- Joined
- Sep 1, 2018
Say hello to the guy you call Daddy for me, Toad.
Lolcow Todd Daugherty / N9OGL / Fox Smith / Doc Dot - Domestic terrorist, ham radio sperg, self-described hikikomori, confirmed pedophile
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2018
It's never going away Toad. Never..... You're branded for life.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2018
There were some people in Taylorsville who were advocating a 2nd Amendment solution to the Toad problem.
Toad down. Next up, Akins the midget.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2018
Yup, him being found guilty or not guilty by a judge isn't his main problem anymore. Street justice has no judge and no jurisdiction. and Street Justice doesn't follow the US Constitution.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2018
Notice when they go out to eat, they put Toad in a safe, protected corner?
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2018
And I thought Dr. Robert McKim's genetics was bad. Notice that older lady is holding his hand and the purse is used to create a comfort, safe zone for him.
EDIT: Robert McKim at least had children and lives on his own. Toad still lives with his parents at age 54 and course, no children (Thank God).
EDIT: Robert McKim at least had children and lives on his own. Toad still lives with his parents at age 54 and course, no children (Thank God).
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2014
Holy shit if there ever was an argument in favor of eugenics, @N90GL , this photo is it. I think I see every recessive allele known to man here. Do you have webbed fingers, Toad?
- Joined
- May 14, 2021
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
I will post this here...Something I'm working on
1. Background
On March 16th, 2018, on a website called Hate and Flame an individual claiming to be Todd E Daugherty N9OGL posted a threat against Memorial School, a school located on the central east side side of Taylorville. The threat read:
“FUCK YOU YOU STALKING MOTHERFUCKERS. I’LL SHOW YOU WHO IS AUSTIC. I’LL GO TO FUCKING MEMORIAL ELEMENTRY SCHOOL AND MAKE SAND HOOK LOOK LIKE A SUNDAY SCHOOL PICNIC”
(Spelling and grammar the same as post - See Attachment A)
Mr. Daugherty has never posted on that site and the only interaction Mr. Daugherty ever had with that site was in 2016 when he sent a DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) Notice to their Internet Service Provider (ISP) after someone posted on the Hate and Flame site one of his science - fiction stories without his permission.
On March 17th, 2018, the local police arrested Todd Daugherty at his home for “something he posted on his website” The police were under the impression that the Hate and Flame website belong to Todd Daugherty. When Daugherty told the police that the site wasn’t his they responded that they “want to talk to him about a threat he posted” Which Daugherty responded that he had not posted any threat. So, the police took Mr. Daugherty to the police station to “talk about it”.
At the station Daugherty again stated he never posted any threat and informed the police that the hate and flame website (which uses the same software as his site) doesn’t require a login and that anyone can post as anyone. The police showed Daugherty the threat and stated, “you would agree that that’s a threat, right?” Daugherty said “yeah” the police then said, “and that’s your name, right?” and which Daugherty responded “Yeah” “So” the police stated, “Any reasonable person would believe that you posted that.” Again, Daugherty said that the police that the site required no login and that anyone could post as anyone. The police went ahead arrested Daugherty stating “we don’t know anything about that” nor did the police validate or investigate Daugherty claim by going on-line and posting on that site to prove no login was required, instead they believed he was guilty based on a “reasonable person” claim, and lack of investigation. So, Daugherty was charged with making a threat directed at a building and or persons (count 1) and a terroristic threat (count 2) (see attachment B). While in jail On March 21st 2018 the police got a warrant for Daugherty’s computers and electronic devices (see Attachment C) to search for “Peer to peer file trading software; any and all information pertaining to dates and times of access to computer; any and all information pertaining to Internet searches pertaining to posts regarding threats of violence directed toward schools or public official; records and other items which evidence ownership or use of computer equipment found in the above residence; including but not limited to sales receipts, bills for Internet access and handwritten notes, records evidencing occupancy or ownership of then premises described above including but not limited to utility and telephone bills, mail envelopes or address correspondence”(Attachment C page 2). Also, while Daugherty was in jail more threats were being posted on that site as him, which was impossible since Daugherty was sitting in a jail cell with no Internet access.
After sitting in jail for one month state dropped the charges (see Attachment D) for the following reasons:
1. The Defendant was arrested on March 17th, 2018.
2. That during the course of the investigation law enforcement has discovered that the web site used to disseminate the threat didn’t require any login credentials and allows anyone to post a message and sign it as a false author.
3. That after the defendant’s arrest there were more messages posted on the same website claiming to be Todd Daugherty which was impossible due to the fact that he was incarcerated
4. That is known that other fictitious post have been recently made on the same site claiming to be authored by judges, the president and other such individuals.
5. The search warrant had been obtained and executed in this case to analyze Todd Daugherty’s Internet activity and have shown nothing to implicate him in this case at this time.
5. That the local, state, and Federal Bureau of Investigation are continuing the investigation into the source of the threats in the matter.
(Attachment D page 1)
It also went on to state “Any warrants or summons previously issued are hereby quashed” (emphasis added)
(Attachment D page 2)
After the charges were dismissed, the police held onto Daugherty’s computers and Daugherty repeatedly asked for the return of his computers which the state attorney office refused to return stated that “law enforcement wasn’t done with them” Daugherty repeatedly asked for the computer up to 2020 - 2021. On August 14th, 2022, Daugherty was arrested again, this time for Child pornography. This One count of Child porn came from the original warrant that was issued in 2018. Under the 2018 warrant the FBI unable to find material relating to the threat abandoned the search and began to look for material outside the scope of the warrant. When they found the image which Daugherty was arrested for, they then got a second warrant so to be “back in compliant with the 4th amendment”
II. Legal Argument
Plaintiff raises serious issues regarding this case.
1. The original warrant that was issued back in 2018 was quashed due to judge dismissing the case and quashing it. As it was stated in the background and in Attachment C page 2 ““Any warrants or summons previously issued are hereby quashed” If the warrant wasn’t quashed then the court should have specified what warrant wasn’t quashed and the reasoning behind it. Finally, the warrants should have been quashed because the state couldn’t achieve “beyond a reasonable doubt” in their case regarding the threat; and even to some degree stated it in the motion to dismissed stated:
1. The Defendant was arrested on March 17th, 2018.
2. That during the course of the investigation law enforcement has discovered that the web site used to disseminate the threat didn’t require any login credentials and allows anyone to post a message and sign it as a false author.
3. That after the defendant’s arrest there were more messages posted on the same website claiming to be Todd Daugherty which was impossible due to the fact that he was incarcerated
4. That is known that other fictitious post has been recently made on the same site claiming to be authored by judges, the president and other such individuals.
5. The search warrant had been obtained and executed in this case to analyze Todd Daugherty’s Internet activity and have shown nothing to implicate him in this case at this time.
As stated above Plaintiff was in jail with no Internet access, yet more threats were posted as him, which proves that “beyond a reasonable doubt” couldn’t be achieved because the website required no login and plaintiff was in jail with no Internet access at all. Plaintiff also argues that under Number 5 law enforcement had obtained logs through his Internet Service Provider (ISP) as well as the Hate and Flame website that shows that plaintiff did not post on that site. The warrant should have been quashed because without actually proof on any kind (which the state didn’t have) they were unable to achieve “beyond a reasonable doubt” Even when the FBI examined the computers and external hard drives, they were unable to find anything to link Plaintiff with the threat. Which bring us to issue number 2
2. If the warrant wasn’t quashed then the FBI went beyond the scope of the 2018 warrant, turning that warrant into a “general warrant”. General warrants are illegal and unconstitutional in the United States. One of the reasons for the 4th amendment was created was so that law enforcement or the government couldn’t issue general warrants and writs of assistance against the citizens, something the British government was known to do against the American colonist.
It was testified in court by Illinois State Police Officer Dorwart that the “FBI was unable to find material regarding the threat and gave up looking. They then proceeded to begin looking through the computers and external hard drives for other contraband.” The 2018 warrant was limited to “Peer to peer file trading software; any and all information pertaining to dates and times of access to computer; any and all information pertaining to Internet searches pertaining to posts regarding threats of violence directed toward schools or public official; records and other items which evidence ownership or use of computer equipment found in the above residence; including but not limited to sales receipts, bills for Internet access and handwritten notes, records evidencing occupancy or ownership of then premises described above including but not limited to utility and telephone bills, mail envelopes or address correspondence” Nowhere in the 2018 warrant did it allow the FBI or state search the computer materials beyond what was listed in the warrant.
Nor was any of this material in “plain view” The material was located in a folder on an external hard drive. The FBI uses software to sort the material into specific folders for example Executable files also known as EXE files would go into a program folder, while text files would go into its own folder and pictures would go into a picture folder and so on. The reason for this program is so that the FBI and other agencies that have this program doesn’t step outside the fourth amendment and the warrant creating a general warrant and a issues like what we have here.
In United States v Carey (US Court of Appeals (1999) Carey was given a search warrant to search his house for material relating to drugs. The police found a computer and took it to search it. After obtaining a warrant to search the computer for name, address and other materials relating to drugs they found a file named “JPG” and left it alone. Unable to find anything they abandoned the search and proceeded to go back to the file “JPG” and it was when they discovered child porn. Carey was arrested and charged with child pornography. Carey sought to have the material suppressed and the charges dismissed, and the district denied it and he appealed it to the US Court of appeal, and they reversed, suppressing the material and dismissing the case. The US Court of appeals stated that law enforcement went beyond the scope of the warrant and turned the warrant into a general warrant. Here we have the same thing, the police and the FBI was limited by the warrant on the search parameters to only look for material regarding a threat against a school. Unable to find anything and wanting to have an arrest decided to go beyond the warrant. The FBI did get a warrant for the child porn on the computer, BUT only after the found the material in clear violation of the 4th amendment and through the general warrant.
1. Background
On March 16th, 2018, on a website called Hate and Flame an individual claiming to be Todd E Daugherty N9OGL posted a threat against Memorial School, a school located on the central east side side of Taylorville. The threat read:
“FUCK YOU YOU STALKING MOTHERFUCKERS. I’LL SHOW YOU WHO IS AUSTIC. I’LL GO TO FUCKING MEMORIAL ELEMENTRY SCHOOL AND MAKE SAND HOOK LOOK LIKE A SUNDAY SCHOOL PICNIC”
(Spelling and grammar the same as post - See Attachment A)
Mr. Daugherty has never posted on that site and the only interaction Mr. Daugherty ever had with that site was in 2016 when he sent a DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) Notice to their Internet Service Provider (ISP) after someone posted on the Hate and Flame site one of his science - fiction stories without his permission.
On March 17th, 2018, the local police arrested Todd Daugherty at his home for “something he posted on his website” The police were under the impression that the Hate and Flame website belong to Todd Daugherty. When Daugherty told the police that the site wasn’t his they responded that they “want to talk to him about a threat he posted” Which Daugherty responded that he had not posted any threat. So, the police took Mr. Daugherty to the police station to “talk about it”.
At the station Daugherty again stated he never posted any threat and informed the police that the hate and flame website (which uses the same software as his site) doesn’t require a login and that anyone can post as anyone. The police showed Daugherty the threat and stated, “you would agree that that’s a threat, right?” Daugherty said “yeah” the police then said, “and that’s your name, right?” and which Daugherty responded “Yeah” “So” the police stated, “Any reasonable person would believe that you posted that.” Again, Daugherty said that the police that the site required no login and that anyone could post as anyone. The police went ahead arrested Daugherty stating “we don’t know anything about that” nor did the police validate or investigate Daugherty claim by going on-line and posting on that site to prove no login was required, instead they believed he was guilty based on a “reasonable person” claim, and lack of investigation. So, Daugherty was charged with making a threat directed at a building and or persons (count 1) and a terroristic threat (count 2) (see attachment B). While in jail On March 21st 2018 the police got a warrant for Daugherty’s computers and electronic devices (see Attachment C) to search for “Peer to peer file trading software; any and all information pertaining to dates and times of access to computer; any and all information pertaining to Internet searches pertaining to posts regarding threats of violence directed toward schools or public official; records and other items which evidence ownership or use of computer equipment found in the above residence; including but not limited to sales receipts, bills for Internet access and handwritten notes, records evidencing occupancy or ownership of then premises described above including but not limited to utility and telephone bills, mail envelopes or address correspondence”(Attachment C page 2). Also, while Daugherty was in jail more threats were being posted on that site as him, which was impossible since Daugherty was sitting in a jail cell with no Internet access.
After sitting in jail for one month state dropped the charges (see Attachment D) for the following reasons:
1. The Defendant was arrested on March 17th, 2018.
2. That during the course of the investigation law enforcement has discovered that the web site used to disseminate the threat didn’t require any login credentials and allows anyone to post a message and sign it as a false author.
3. That after the defendant’s arrest there were more messages posted on the same website claiming to be Todd Daugherty which was impossible due to the fact that he was incarcerated
4. That is known that other fictitious post have been recently made on the same site claiming to be authored by judges, the president and other such individuals.
5. The search warrant had been obtained and executed in this case to analyze Todd Daugherty’s Internet activity and have shown nothing to implicate him in this case at this time.
5. That the local, state, and Federal Bureau of Investigation are continuing the investigation into the source of the threats in the matter.
(Attachment D page 1)
It also went on to state “Any warrants or summons previously issued are hereby quashed” (emphasis added)
(Attachment D page 2)
After the charges were dismissed, the police held onto Daugherty’s computers and Daugherty repeatedly asked for the return of his computers which the state attorney office refused to return stated that “law enforcement wasn’t done with them” Daugherty repeatedly asked for the computer up to 2020 - 2021. On August 14th, 2022, Daugherty was arrested again, this time for Child pornography. This One count of Child porn came from the original warrant that was issued in 2018. Under the 2018 warrant the FBI unable to find material relating to the threat abandoned the search and began to look for material outside the scope of the warrant. When they found the image which Daugherty was arrested for, they then got a second warrant so to be “back in compliant with the 4th amendment”
II. Legal Argument
Plaintiff raises serious issues regarding this case.
1. The original warrant that was issued back in 2018 was quashed due to judge dismissing the case and quashing it. As it was stated in the background and in Attachment C page 2 ““Any warrants or summons previously issued are hereby quashed” If the warrant wasn’t quashed then the court should have specified what warrant wasn’t quashed and the reasoning behind it. Finally, the warrants should have been quashed because the state couldn’t achieve “beyond a reasonable doubt” in their case regarding the threat; and even to some degree stated it in the motion to dismissed stated:
1. The Defendant was arrested on March 17th, 2018.
2. That during the course of the investigation law enforcement has discovered that the web site used to disseminate the threat didn’t require any login credentials and allows anyone to post a message and sign it as a false author.
3. That after the defendant’s arrest there were more messages posted on the same website claiming to be Todd Daugherty which was impossible due to the fact that he was incarcerated
4. That is known that other fictitious post has been recently made on the same site claiming to be authored by judges, the president and other such individuals.
5. The search warrant had been obtained and executed in this case to analyze Todd Daugherty’s Internet activity and have shown nothing to implicate him in this case at this time.
As stated above Plaintiff was in jail with no Internet access, yet more threats were posted as him, which proves that “beyond a reasonable doubt” couldn’t be achieved because the website required no login and plaintiff was in jail with no Internet access at all. Plaintiff also argues that under Number 5 law enforcement had obtained logs through his Internet Service Provider (ISP) as well as the Hate and Flame website that shows that plaintiff did not post on that site. The warrant should have been quashed because without actually proof on any kind (which the state didn’t have) they were unable to achieve “beyond a reasonable doubt” Even when the FBI examined the computers and external hard drives, they were unable to find anything to link Plaintiff with the threat. Which bring us to issue number 2
2. If the warrant wasn’t quashed then the FBI went beyond the scope of the 2018 warrant, turning that warrant into a “general warrant”. General warrants are illegal and unconstitutional in the United States. One of the reasons for the 4th amendment was created was so that law enforcement or the government couldn’t issue general warrants and writs of assistance against the citizens, something the British government was known to do against the American colonist.
It was testified in court by Illinois State Police Officer Dorwart that the “FBI was unable to find material regarding the threat and gave up looking. They then proceeded to begin looking through the computers and external hard drives for other contraband.” The 2018 warrant was limited to “Peer to peer file trading software; any and all information pertaining to dates and times of access to computer; any and all information pertaining to Internet searches pertaining to posts regarding threats of violence directed toward schools or public official; records and other items which evidence ownership or use of computer equipment found in the above residence; including but not limited to sales receipts, bills for Internet access and handwritten notes, records evidencing occupancy or ownership of then premises described above including but not limited to utility and telephone bills, mail envelopes or address correspondence” Nowhere in the 2018 warrant did it allow the FBI or state search the computer materials beyond what was listed in the warrant.
Nor was any of this material in “plain view” The material was located in a folder on an external hard drive. The FBI uses software to sort the material into specific folders for example Executable files also known as EXE files would go into a program folder, while text files would go into its own folder and pictures would go into a picture folder and so on. The reason for this program is so that the FBI and other agencies that have this program doesn’t step outside the fourth amendment and the warrant creating a general warrant and a issues like what we have here.
In United States v Carey (US Court of Appeals (1999) Carey was given a search warrant to search his house for material relating to drugs. The police found a computer and took it to search it. After obtaining a warrant to search the computer for name, address and other materials relating to drugs they found a file named “JPG” and left it alone. Unable to find anything they abandoned the search and proceeded to go back to the file “JPG” and it was when they discovered child porn. Carey was arrested and charged with child pornography. Carey sought to have the material suppressed and the charges dismissed, and the district denied it and he appealed it to the US Court of appeal, and they reversed, suppressing the material and dismissing the case. The US Court of appeals stated that law enforcement went beyond the scope of the warrant and turned the warrant into a general warrant. Here we have the same thing, the police and the FBI was limited by the warrant on the search parameters to only look for material regarding a threat against a school. Unable to find anything and wanting to have an arrest decided to go beyond the warrant. The FBI did get a warrant for the child porn on the computer, BUT only after the found the material in clear violation of the 4th amendment and through the general warrant.
- Joined
- May 14, 2021
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
No just that YOU can't read.
unapologetic for what? I don't know how that image got there. funny according to the state the image was created on March 21, 2018, which is impossible because I was sitting in a jail cell.
unapologetic for what? I don't know how that image got there. funny according to the state the image was created on March 21, 2018, which is impossible because I was sitting in a jail cell.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- May 14, 2021
You know, just purely speaking for myself, the whole school shooting did you - didn't you thing never was my main problem with you.
You plainly state that there was child pornography on you computer
BUT I'm not going to start this dance again since it's been done to death already and there'sa warning against it
You plainly state that there was child pornography on you computer
Whether they had grounds to look for it or not, does not change the fact that they found child porn on your computer, Todd.
BUT I'm not going to start this dance again since it's been done to death already and there'sa warning against it
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
The issue with that is 1. the local police didn't hand the computer over to the FBI till 2020. The original warrant to search the computer was quashed, meaning they had no right to search the computer. The computer was in their possession for two years before they handed it over. So there that issue of the computers becoming tainted. and 2. as stated above I don't know where that image (BTW it was just one image) came from. For someone to obtain child porn you can just google it, in fact from understanding from read articles the only way to get child porn is through the dark web and to do that is through a TOR program and I have no such program. In fact, the FBI searched for a TOR program and found none, because that's what the threat against the school came from, was through TOR.
James done did it
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2020
I think its clear the state just wants to put you away before you rape a kid. Good on them.
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2015
If, in fact, you obtained and were in possession of legitimate child pornography -i.e., actual imagery/videos of actual underage children - you deserve whatever you get.
If, in fact, the image in question is merely "loli", you're still a creep, but you wouldn't deserve to be jailed for it.
Obviously you were in jail from March 17, 2018 for at least one month; if I recall correctly your hardware was seized the day you were arrested. If what you say above is correct then not only were you not in position to place the material on your devices, but the devices were not even in your possession - but that of law enforcement. More interestingly, depending on the truth of what's been posted on the "F4" shithole, a complaint was made in or about August 2022 which resulted in this action; who could have possibly made a legitimate compliant about a device not in your possession for over four years?
I, personally, want more information before I condemn you.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
First off here how went down:
March 16th, 2018, the threat was posted
March 17th, 2018, I was arrested
March 21st, 2018, the warrant was issued for the warrant
April 16th, 2018, the chargers were dismissed, and the warrants were quashed
Sometime in 2020 the police hands computers over the FBI and they search them
Unable to find any threat under the warrant they decide to turn it into a general warrant (which is illegal) and found an image that is allegedly child porn. The FBI then goes to the US Attorney office to see if they wanted to prosecute, they said NO and handed back to the FBI.
In August 2022 the FBI returned to the state and in September I was arrested
The claim about a complaint is not true. August 2022 is when the State police received the computers back from the FBI
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2018
He's implying that the police planted it on his computer. The only other possibility is that his parents planted on his computer after he got arrested.
Now he's lying and making up a fake timeline. and storyline. This is what is going to happen.
1. Expert witnesses from the FBI and State police are going to say it's child pornography
2. Any judge or jury will believe the EXPERT witnesses, not him.
3. He will be found guilty
When they searched his computer, they found his child porn in plain sight.
He also claims to know what the image was but yet says he didn't download it so how can he possibly know what the file is because he's not allowed to view it under the court order? (he says it's lolicon, but again, how does he know this????)
If you view this thread and the 1,000s of responses, you'll see Todd lies and just makes stuff up.
That part is complete fabrication. The US attorney DEFERRED to the state, which happens in 95% of these cases. The part where someone download the child porn after he was in jail is completely made up by him.
Now he's lying and making up a fake timeline. and storyline. This is what is going to happen.
1. Expert witnesses from the FBI and State police are going to say it's child pornography
2. Any judge or jury will believe the EXPERT witnesses, not him.
3. He will be found guilty
When they searched his computer, they found his child porn in plain sight.
He also claims to know what the image was but yet says he didn't download it so how can he possibly know what the file is because he's not allowed to view it under the court order? (he says it's lolicon, but again, how does he know this????)
If you view this thread and the 1,000s of responses, you'll see Todd lies and just makes stuff up.
That part is complete fabrication. The US attorney DEFERRED to the state, which happens in 95% of these cases. The part where someone download the child porn after he was in jail is completely made up by him.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
How do I know...BECAUSE THEY TOLD ME IN COURT!! DUMBASS!!! You don't know what the hell you are talking about. The only LIAR here is YOU; crawl back to F4BBS where you belong LIAR
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2018
And i'll add this and then allow Toad to run tons of garbage and cut and paste and lies..... Toad should have asked for his computers back after April 16, 2018. He never did. I even showed him the form and how to do it and that he one year. And he should have hired a real lawyer to ask for them back, and if they said NO, that lawyer would have filed a court injunction to order them back.
No court filing was ever filed by Mr. Daugherty, no forms filed by Mr. Daugherty
Thus, he forfeited the property
Thread below reserved for endless rantings and lies by Mr. Daugherty
If he had done what I told him in 2018, 2022 never happens. And if he hired a real lawyer in 2018, he doesn't spend a month a jail, he's out in 2 days.
Space reserved below for Daugherty's rantings....
No, how do you know what the image was and involved? how can you possibly know it was LOLICON OR NOT, they didn't show you the image. What they did tell you in court is that it was child pornography and the state's expert witness said it was child porn. They believed them, not you. Just like they will in trial.
And if they said it was downloaded while you were in jail, the DISTRICT ATTORNEY, PUBLIC DEFENDER, and JUDGE would have all agreed to drop the case on the spot.
So it never happened and you are lying again.
No court filing was ever filed by Mr. Daugherty, no forms filed by Mr. Daugherty
Thus, he forfeited the property
Thread below reserved for endless rantings and lies by Mr. Daugherty
If he had done what I told him in 2018, 2022 never happens. And if he hired a real lawyer in 2018, he doesn't spend a month a jail, he's out in 2 days.
Space reserved below for Daugherty's rantings....
No, how do you know what the image was and involved? how can you possibly know it was LOLICON OR NOT, they didn't show you the image. What they did tell you in court is that it was child pornography and the state's expert witness said it was child porn. They believed them, not you. Just like they will in trial.
And if they said it was downloaded while you were in jail, the DISTRICT ATTORNEY, PUBLIC DEFENDER, and JUDGE would have all agreed to drop the case on the spot.
So it never happened and you are lying again.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
because they described it in court jackass...funny how I was there, and YOU weren't. BTW there is a lot more to it. there is a lot of questions including the quashed warrant, the fact that they went beyond the scope of the warrant and a few other things, including when it was download and why it took so long 4 years to charge me