The real truth

[admin]

1. A search warrant was issued to investigate an alleged threat against a school.
   
2. That warrant was a general warrant—it failed to specify what evidence was being sought and did not establish any connection between the seized computers and the alleged crime.
   
3. The warrant was quashed by court order on April 16, 2018, rendering it legally void.
   
4. Despite this, the FBI searched the computers on April 23, 2018, using a warrant that was no longer valid, and allegedly discovered one computer-generated image.
   

I am now being criminally charged based on an image found a full week after the warrant was quashed. This is not just improper—it’s unprecedented. There are no known cases in U.S. legal history where evidence obtained under a quashed warrant has been used to prosecute someone. It violates the Fourth Amendment and undermines the integrity of the judicial process.

[admin]

COME ON BITCHES...PROVE MY ASS WRONG, YOU WANT TO ACTUALLY WIN.

[admin]

If you're not going to participate in the discussion I will delete your shit.

[admin]

Again, if you're not going to contribute to the discussion then don't post. asinine comments will be deleted, and you will be banned

[Big Fucking Deal]

You're an endless loop saying the same stuff endlessly... It's already been refuted.

WHINE TOAD WHINE. THERE IS NOTHING YOU'RE GOING TO DO ABOUT IT.

[admin]

No it hasn't. I will tell you to tell me, but you've been banned

[admin]

The claim that I consented to the search is categorically false. There is no record—written, verbal, or implied—of me ever consenting to the search of my devices. Consent must be explicit and documented; it cannot be inferred from judicial actions or investigative momentum. The judge’s decision to allow the investigation to continue does not equate to personal consent.
Moreover, that’s not even the State’s argument. The State maintains that the original 2018 search warrant was never quashed and remains valid to this day. They claim it has no expiration, which—if true—would mean they could return at any time and seize additional devices under that same warrant. That’s not just unconstitutional—it’s a general warrant in violation of the Fourth Amendment.