What errors are you speaking of?
If reports are accurate, the initial warrant named the wrong man as being “married” to the girl that placed the call. The man named in the warrant is related to, and shares a very similar name with, the man who is the father of her child. But they got the name wrong.
I tend to believe the idea the warrants contained an error because the reports that they had named the wrong man are not coming from sympathizers of the FLDS, but people associated with Tapestry Against Polygamy, which has worked with a number of the girls and women that escaped the FLDS, and does a pretty good job of keeping track of who is “married” to whom. The people at Tapestry have been very aggressive in trying to get Utah and Arizona to act on reports of abuse in the FLDS for years.
This is also why the man named in the warrant, who is already on probation and is not in hiding, was not arrested. In fact very basic police work would have let them know exactly where he was (in Arizona, not at the compound) as he meets regularly with his probation officer.
There is a great deal of concern that any evidence gathered in the first search could be deemed inadmissible. There is also concern that the later warrants could have been based on evidence gathered from the first warrant, and could therefore also be deemed invalid.
At this point it is all speculation, and it is possible that interviews with the women and children that left the compound provided enough probable cause for the additional warrants.
But it does present a potential problem, especially if any cases that are brought don’t include testimony of the girls and women involved.