Madison wrote:RugbyD wrote:Madison wrote:For all we know, one of her kids is a drug dealer and the intel said he was stashing stuff at his mother's. Which means the warrant was justified and correct,...
You couldn't be more wrong.
Really? I didn't see proof anywhere that either one of her kids isn't a drug dealer. Link please?
And I was simply giving an alternative, speculating a bit since the article doesn't give any info. I have no proof either of her kids are drug dealers, but you've got no proof they aren't, so it very well could be exactly what I said, just like it could be what you said. But I won't stoop to calling you "wrong" unless I can prove it of course (which I can't).
I said you were wrong b/c you indicated that if intel said XYZ, the warrant is justified. Validity of the warrant is entirely dependent on the validity of the intel. Your statement assumed valid intel, which is a wrong assumption to make, as would be assuming invalid intel.