Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How ^NOT to Forge a Search Warrant

dirtyprosecutor.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 53 posts

Re: How ^NOT to Forge a Search Warrant

#31

Post by [deleted] »

pixl97 wrote: post #20
salawat wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ABA states: Standard 3-1.2 Functions and Duties of the Prosecutor >(b) The primary duty of the prosecutor is to seek justice within the bounds of the law, not merely to convict. The prosecutor serves the public interest and should act with integrity and balanced judgment to increase public safety both by pursuing appropriate criminal charges of appropriate severity, and by exercising discretion to not pursue criminal…

And you might even get 10 days in jail for it! In the meantime you'll get reelected again and again for being 'tough on crime'. The incentives are misaligned for an optimal outcome.

[deleted]

Re: How ^NOT to Forge a Search Warrant

#32

Post by primitivesuave »

vxNsr wrote: post #21
primitivesuave wrote: post #19

The defendant defrauded Office Max's loyalty program to the tune of ~$180,000, although they managed to void $130k of rewards upon uncovering the scheme. They did so in a manner that could easily be traced back to them (e.g. signing up for 5400 Office Max accounts using the same 4 GMail addresses with randomly inserted periods to make slightly different user IDs). They accessed the email from the same IP address, put…

What are you basing this comment on?

Reading the indictment: https://dirtyprosecutor.org/11401.pdf

If you skip to page 12 and 13, you get a pretty good sense of the amateur nature of this fraud.

There is a preponderance of evidence against [name redacted]. He used the same emails from the fraudulent scheme to sign up for a Netflix account, pay for items shipped to his home address, and even used a personal PayPal account in conjunction with stolen rewards to make purchases. The FBI got data from eBay, Netflix, Google, and even Staples, to make a pretty airtight argument that this guy was the sole perpetuator behind the fraud.

Re: How ^NOT to Forge a Search Warrant

#33

Post by hackish »

formerly_proven wrote: post #22

(16 minute video, didn't watch) Generally speaking, search warrants are pretty easy to get for prosecutors, and for good reason: If they required a ton of hard evidence to get, then a prosecutor wouldn't need it any more, they'd just charge the suspect. The entire reason for having search warrants is that there is "something" (a fact) which suggests you'll "probably" find evidence of a crime. So because they are easy…

I'm no fan of the U.S. justice system, but the evidence in the affidavit included in the search warrant application undoubtedly gets the form signed in this case.

Did this FBI special agent risk the case, his career, and prior cases to take down a barely-six-figure crime scheme? Or did he open his network share and print "AO_106_Affidavit_for_Search_Warrant_7-87-scanned-OCR-dont-use.docx", last edited by Johnny the intern, instead of "AO106-latest.pdf"?

Re: How ^NOT to Forge a Search Warrant

#34

Post by AifVI »

This should not be here.

This is an individual criminal defendant complaining about an alleged forgery of documents in their own case, and also arguing that the U.S. Attorney's Office was in a "corrupt alliance with OfficeMax," followed by a rant against the U.S. judicial system, prosecutors, and judges, and then a request for money and self-promotion of his merchandise and his book about another subject.

Re: How ^NOT to Forge a Search Warrant

#35

Post by AifVI »

hackish wrote: post #33
formerly_proven wrote: post #22

(16 minute video, didn't watch) Generally speaking, search warrants are pretty easy to get for prosecutors, and for good reason: If they required a ton of hard evidence to get, then a prosecutor wouldn't need it any more, they'd just charge the suspect. The entire reason for having search warrants is that there is "something" (a fact) which suggests you'll "probably" find evidence of a crime. So because they are easy…

I'm no fan of the U.S. justice system, but the evidence in the affidavit included in the search warrant application undoubtedly gets the form signed in this case. Did this FBI special agent risk the case, his career, and prior cases to take down a barely-six-figure crime scheme? Or did he open his network share and print "AO_106_Affidavit_for_Search_Warrant_7-87-scanned-OCR-dont-use.docx", last edited by Johnny the i…

Exactly. The evidence in the video is utterly meaningless.

Here is what he has:

- The scan of the magistrate judge's pen looks like it is running out of ink.

- The form was copied and edited, and some of the edits use inconsistent fonts or have artifacts from being printed and scanned previously.

- The magistrate judge left off the year in one instance, and the time in another.

So what? Nothing about that says anything was forged. It's not unusual for attorneys and the Court to use messed up forms, because the forms aren't what matters. You could hand-write it on a napkin and it would be valid. Nor is it unusual for a hurried judge to be inconsistent in how they sign things.

Nothing here indicates a "forgery."

Re: How ^NOT to Forge a Search Warrant

#36

Post by AifVI »

mythrwy wrote: post #12
dotancohen wrote: post #3

Why would a prosecutor risk his own career and jail time to forge documents?

Maybe they really believe the person did it and the "law and evidence" is in their way? Or maybe they just want more convictions on their record? But ya, scummy behavior.

> But ya, scummy behavior.

Did you watch the video? This is a convicted criminal nitpicking documents in his own case and then ranting about the judicial system. There is no real indication that any fraud or "scummy behavior" occurred here at all.

Re: How ^NOT to Forge a Search Warrant

#37

Post by michaelmrose »

mchannon wrote: post #6
anigbrowl wrote: post #2

Interesting title, useless content. Video seems to be just a collection of document screenshots. Faking search warrants is a serious issue, but the compiler of this collection would have a lot more impact by adding a few hundred words to explain the point of the site instead of leaving it as a puzzle for the reader. Is this an attack on bad prosecutors in general? Is the website author the victim of prosecutorial har…

Thanks for the attempt at constructive criticism. There are actually that many words as subtitles in the video, I didn't leave out the hearing impaired. And a few hundred words are not necessary when six words at the top of the screen pretty much make it clear to most people. Maybe is not big enough, will consider making it bigger.

The point of the words isn't in service of the hearing impaired it's to convince the person of the worthiness of a cause or at least to keep an open mind while watching a 16 minute youtube video. The meat of many matters can be digested in about 10 seconds and the whole meal disposed of in 5-10 minutes given that adults easily read at 300 words per minute.

Most "causes" on youtube are to be quite frank absolute garbage and take 15-30 minutes to cover issues that could profitably have been read in 2 minutes of actual content in between ads and words from your sponsor. You had about 10 seconds to convince people that they wouldn't be wasting their time watching the video and you entirely failed.

Based on reading others analysis it could have been summarized as convicted conman who is almost certainly guilty alleges unproven proprietorial misconduct to distract from own guilt and invites rubes to get in on the con on the ground floor.

I believe that misconduct happens even happens frequently and have an interest in stopping it but I don't believe the most effective vehicle for that change would be donating money to a conman. I would prefer causes like the ACLU and the innocence project while leaving this party to handle his own affairs. I trust that his extreme vested interest in dealing with this matter will inspire him to pursue it to its end without outside investment.

Re: How ^NOT to Forge a Search Warrant

#38

Post by AifVI »

pixl97 wrote: post #5
dotancohen wrote: post #3

Why would a prosecutor risk his own career and jail time to forge documents?

I mean looking a prosecutors to be moral people is your first mistake. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ex-texas-prosecutor-fir... >A former Texas district attorney agreed Friday to serve 10 days in jail for withholding evidence that could have stopped an innocent man from going to prison for nearly 25 years — apparently the first time a prosecutor has been sent to jail for concealing evidence helpful to the defe…

So one prosecutor acted unethically one time, and that is your evidence that "looking [at] prosecutors to be moral people is [a] mistake"?

Come on. First, that's literally one person out of thousands. Second, your example is a single state court prosecutor. The U.S. Attorney's office has extremely high ethical standards.

Re: How ^NOT to Forge a Search Warrant

#39

Post by hirundo »

mchannon wrote: post #18
csydas wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Happy to help. And interesting, yes, the gofundme was live when I watched the video on the site (link is on the site). I think it's just maybe how GoFundMe handle's the links? https://gofund.me/a58c25bd Works as normal I suppose for you.

Appreciate your updating (and catching) that. GoFundMe apparently thought it needed to be changed. No alert to me or anything. Guess I'll have to make one minor change in iMovie and re-upload 2GB. I hope they don't pull this again.

Mr. Channon, is there anything you can say at this point about the allegations in the indictment? Are they whole-cloth fabrications, misreadings of the law, accurate, something else? Is there a victim here besides yourself?

Re: How ^NOT to Forge a Search Warrant

#40

Post by pixl97 »

AifVI wrote: post #38
pixl97 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean looking a prosecutors to be moral people is your first mistake. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ex-texas-prosecutor-fir... >A former Texas district attorney agreed Friday to serve 10 days in jail for withholding evidence that could have stopped an innocent man from going to prison for nearly 25 years — apparently the first time a prosecutor has been sent to jail for concealing evidence helpful to the defe…

So one prosecutor acted unethically one time, and that is your evidence that "looking [at] prosecutors to be moral people is [a] mistake"? Come on. First, that's literally one person out of thousands. Second, your example is a single state court prosecutor. The U.S. Attorney's office has extremely high ethical standards.

I'm sure that in the days before cameras everywhere you'd be stating to the first instance of recorded police abuse "That's literally one cop out of thousands, second this is just one police department". But it turns out as more cameras have shown up, and as more people look we seem to find more and more cases. I guess the cameras cause cops to abuse people.
Post reply on HN