- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
Fact the police can only search for what's in the warrant. In the search warrant to search my computer the items where 1. p2p software (Tor) 2. Logs to the computer on access time. 3. Internet search's regarding threating schools and public officials 4. Proof that I live where I live. 3. proof internet access and that's it. the police cannot do a general search inside the computer, that illegal under the 4th amendment. general warrants are illegal in the united states.
United States v. Ganias, 755 F.3d 125 (2d Cir. 2014)
With a sufficient probable cause basis, government agents obtained a search warrant to seize defendant’s computers and search for files related to two particular corporate entities. The agents made mirror images of the hard drives of the computers and brought them back to the forensic laboratory. At no time did the agents delete anything from the hard drives that were unrelated to the entities listed in the warrant. Over the next two and one-half years, however, the agents determined that the defendant was engaged in other crimes. Aware that they were not permitted to review files other than those listed in the warrant, the agents obtained a second search warrant to examine other files in the mirror hard drives. The Second Circuit held that the extended retention of the files violated the Fourth Amendment. While an initial seizure of the entire computer may be permissible in some cases; and the government is permitted to conduct the search the computer off-site (Rule 41(e)(2)(B)), the retention of the files for 2 ½ years knowing that the files were not covered by the warrant violated the principle that searches must be limited by the “to be seized” clause of the warrant in order to avoid the “general searches” that were condemned by the Framers. Permitting the government to seize everything in a computer and retain everything for years despite the absence of any probable cause or authority in the warrant results in suppressing any evidence discovered in the files (even if later authorized by a subsequent warrant) that were not subject to the initial warrant’s “to be seized” clause. The Second Circuit also held that the fact that these files no longer existed on the defendant’s original computers 2 ½ years later is irrelevant.
I also want to mention there was plain view in this matter. The state trooper attached to this case stated in court that the FBI found NOTHING to connect me to the threat. After they were unable to find anything linking me to the threat, they then proceeded to look for other contraband outside the warrant. In other words, they were done looking for material under the warrant. This state trooper made that statement under oath in court.
we know. You've admitted to liking lolicon, you can't retcon that now. 