Let me see if I got this right the government doesn’t have to prove a thing just get a restraining order and force out the men until they prove their innocence. Since when do people have to prove their innocence when faced with an accusation.
I would be careful about getting caught up in all the hoopla around this case because Texas may wind up with egg on its face. Somebody correct me if I’m wrong but if Texas can’t produce the original complainant will all the evidence seized be fruit of the poisonous tree?
Well now, I've been out of practice for awhile, but from what I remember from law school, the “fruit of the poisonous tree” requires that the governmental authorities act in bad faith, or at least sloppy negligence, when instituting their initial search. In this case, the authorities acted on what they believed was a bona fide complaint. If any fraud was committed, it was on the part of the complainant, not the government.
Anyhow, that's the argument I'd make in court if I were the prosecutor.