[devwastaken]

"is it more likely" if you want to base criminal acts on "more likely" then you're making vast assumptions similar to tabloid drama. You or I don't know the facts of any of this until it's brought and argued in court. People lie, prosecutors lie, defendants lie and neither you nor I can magically predict the outcome. It can very well be occam's razor applies, however occams razor is a logical fallacy.

Officers have a well known history of not having a warrant and acting like they have a warrant so you'll give them implicit permission to search and seize. I don't blame anyone for denying them entry.

You don't have to spoof an IP. Depending on the system you just need a text editor. Are their access logs under good chain of custody? How would a tech illiterate judge know?

These are reasons why I wait for the text of the case.

[colechristensen]

A search warrant isn’t a conviction. You don’t need that much to get one granted and they had plenty.