Generally speaking, search warrants are pretty easy to get for prosecutors, and for good reason: If they required a ton of hard evidence to get, then a prosecutor wouldn't need it any more, they'd just charge the suspect. The entire reason for having search warrants is that there is "something" (a fact) which suggests you'll "probably" find evidence of a crime.
So because they are easy to get, why exactly would a prosecutor need to forge a warrant?
Did this FBI special agent risk the case, his career, and prior cases to take down a barely-six-figure crime scheme? Or did he open his network share and print "AO_106_Affidavit_for_Search_Warrant_7-87-scanned-OCR-dont-use.docx", last edited by Johnny the intern, instead of "AO106-latest.pdf"?
Here is what he has:
- The scan of the magistrate judge's pen looks like it is running out of ink.
- The form was copied and edited, and some of the edits use inconsistent fonts or have artifacts from being printed and scanned previously.
- The magistrate judge left off the year in one instance, and the time in another.
So what? Nothing about that says anything was forged. It's not unusual for attorneys and the Court to use messed up forms, because the forms aren't what matters. You could hand-write it on a napkin and it would be valid. Nor is it unusual for a hurried judge to be inconsistent in how they sign things.
Nothing here indicates a "forgery."
Thus was born the "confidential informant" to get around that last little problem the 4th amendment held in their way