Worth the read . . .

Chism v. Washington.  Here are a couple of clips.  This was a case of a false search affidavit based on affirmative misrepresentations and material omissions.

Our conclusion also finds support in the WSP’s training materials, which explain:

Much, if not all, of the cyber-evidence (the E-mail addresses and IP addresses used) will lead you to an innocent person. That’s why simply identifying which account was used to commit a crime does not provide you with probable cause to get a search or arrest warrant for the name and address on that
account. You’ll need to do more investigating to determine if there is a link between the account
holder (or other members of the household) with the criminal activity that was committed with that


[T]o have any success as an Internet criminal, regardless of whether one was a thief, a hacker or a child pornography collector, it would be incumbent to use other people’s identities to do so. . . . It is primarily for this reason that relying only on information provided by the user of a credit card that is associated with criminal activity is inherently unreliable.

h/t a CMTP lurker.

Posted in:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *