GrapheneOS user accused of child sexual abuse for protesting police training facility

submitted by

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVvlgMf1hAg

theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jul/23/cop-city-protester-phone

consumerrights.wiki/w/Common_Questions,Arguments,&_Responses_when_discussing_Flock_Surveillance

66
278

Back to main discussion

Parent comment

It was a targeted harassment search into a political nuisance, not an actual warranted investigation. There was no charge. They let him walk away. Can’t have evidence if there was no crime.

It was a targeted harassment search into a political nuisance, not an actual warranted investigation

There is no difference, legally.

Can’t have evidence if there was no crime

Can’t know if there was a crime if the evidence was destroyed. Imagine if a corporation were being investigated for some sort of crime and they just went and deleted any evidence of it. Does your statement still apply?

If there’s no suspicion of a crime, there’s no legal search. So no evidence to gather.

ok but…there was. Regardless of whether it’s legitimate.

No there wasn’t.

You should read the article again. The suspicion was CSAM.

That was the alleged suspicion. They were fishing because they don’t like that the guy is against cop city.

That’s the suspicion they will cite in court.



Based solely on the fact that he protested the cops hq. That was their excuse after their illegal search attempt. If there was an actual suspicion, they’d have a warrant and be searching his property, not just holding him up at the airport for a few minutes.

Are you always this easy to fool? We all know this admin isn’t going after actual child abusers.

I am not being fooled. I just understand how our justice system works. There is no rational thought process. Only consideration of the law. The prosecutors won’t say anything about his protesting. They will only cite suspicion of CSAM.









Insert image