"It's not based on the wording of the indictments
alone, but on the words and opinions expressed
by the prosecutor (Fitz) made at the press
conference giving voicer to his reasons for
indicting Libby."
I understand what you're saying, but when this case goes to court, the words of someone at a press conference will not be admissible. The latter has no relevance to the crimes for which Libby has been indicted.
So if in the execution of a warrant, police break
into a locked room, or papers, that are not
specified or covered in the warrant. they are
now admissiable as evidence?