Are you avoiding a responsive answer to my question? As it is, you contend that the appellate courts are 40/60 in following the law.
Is your professional opinion that reciting the elements of the crime is sufficient basis for establishing probable cause?
For now, it's a hypothetical question, but it merits a direct answer.
My professional opinion is that as a matter of law, reciting the elements of the crime is insufficient basis for establishing probable cause.
If I was bored, I'd go back and check to see how many times he made a direct answer to the substance of a post, rather than a deflection onto a topic of HIS choice.