zlacker

I'm also suspicious that the article keeps emphasizing "amateur photos given to authorities" as if they are deliberately steering away from the term "police surveillance footage" or perhaps "images obtained by scanning social media".

While I have no issue with police investigating lawbreakers, the public should know what the police are doing and how, so they can be confident that police are correctly following the law while executing their duty.

But perhaps I'm reading too much into that wording, and in fact some protesters who took photos thought the arson was over-reach, so they supplied the photos to the police.

>>Smoosh+(OP)
You’re definitely right. This twitter thread uses excerpts from the charging documents to explain the steps the FBI took: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1273098216775524355.html

>>elliek+F2
That thread suddenly disappeared, and one which is claimed to be a "reconstructed" copy in another profile has disappeared too, it's so weird. It's not like the original PDF isn't online still.