OK - what you posted is actually an exception to Fruit of the Poisonous Tree.

This doesn't apply to this case. And here's why:

What you posted is the inevitable discovery exception to the exclusionary rule. This applies to evidence seized by law enforcement that is tainted due to processing errors in warrants.

The idea is - do we admit evidence seized when there is a clerical error in the warrant, thus making the warrant invalid and the therefore the seizue illegal?  The ruling doesn't address "illegal" conduct, i.e., hacking or theft. The term "illegal" pertains to invalid warrants due to clerical errors, i.e., incorrect addresses, misspelled names, incorrect birthdates, etc.

Basically, what it means is, evidence obtained with an illegal warrant is still admissible if that evidence would have been obtained with a proper warrant. But even then, it's application isn't broad enough to include warrantless searches without probable cause, etc.

So, the inevitable discovery is a lot narrower than you're trying to apply it, there's nothing general about it.


But the jpgs wouldn't fly anyway, their authenticty can't be proven.