Read on Twitter
OK, so everyone can understand what I'm on about with the Subpoena thing in the "Hunter Biden" nonsense from the Post: Now that pretty much everyone knows it was SA Joshua Wilson from the Wilmington RA who signed the service, and assuming it's the same Wilson who (like me) 1/
spent a long time working child exploitation seizing tons of PCs, the subpoena is weird. There are two principal ways to get authorization to *SEARCH* a hard drive: Consent from a person w/ access & authority, or a warrant. Warrant is best - always - but written consent is OK. 2/
It gets complicated in some districts with third-party consent, but this story (concocted perhaps with a former prosecutor) is written exactly to the case law: a computer repairman "innocently" finds something "criminal" and calls the FBI. What normally happens then is this: 3/
An agent goes out, takes a statement, gets the document the owner of the computer signed, ensures that the repairman could legally consent to the removal of the PC, has him/her sign a consent to search, gives them a receipt, and leaves. 4/
If it *really* looks like there might be something there, you get a warrant. Period.
But the only times someone asked me for a subpoena in such cases was when the *consenting party* asked, "Could you cover me with some paper?" which is a way to CYA if the customer sues. 5/
But the only times someone asked me for a subpoena in such cases was when the *consenting party* asked, "Could you cover me with some paper?" which is a way to CYA if the customer sues. 5/
Don't get me wrong: you can get subpoenaed to bring anything - records, hard drives, a ham sandwich - anything before a GJ, but that doesn't mean the FBI can *search* the hard drive of a computer. Subpoenas are far too easy to get for that. 6/
But if you're going to take the computer to search it, and the consent is dodgy ("cover me with some paper, bro"), you get a warrant.
*IF* - and this is a big if- you can *swear to a judge* you have Probable Cause to believe: 7/
*IF* - and this is a big if- you can *swear to a judge* you have Probable Cause to believe: 7/
1) A federal crime has occurred
*and*
2) Evidence of it is likely on that computer now
If you can't do that, you take it, give bro his paper, talk to the AUSA, peek just enough around to convince yourself it's bogus, and give it back (hence why that external HD is with Rudy) 8/
*and*
2) Evidence of it is likely on that computer now
If you can't do that, you take it, give bro his paper, talk to the AUSA, peek just enough around to convince yourself it's bogus, and give it back (hence why that external HD is with Rudy) 8/
Now, maybe there's some other set of circumstances here which I'm not considering - I have no inside information, and I've been out of the game for a while. But as of this moment and what I've seen, this just sounds like a bunch of nonsense. Maybe they did get a warrant, 9/
hit the jackpot, and then... sat around for months and months twiddling their thumbs, waiting for the NY Post to break it all wide open for them. Maybe, but...
