Daniel Rigmaiden Now: Where Does He Stand Today in 2022?

Daniel Rigmaid

Netflix

A Netflix promotional image.

Daniel Rigmaiden escaped a hefty prison sentence following allegations of tax fraud after making a series of filings that revealed privacy concerns. He was the subject of the last two episodes of the Netflix series Web of Make Believe: Death, Lies and the Internet.

Rigmaiden has been charged with 74 counts of mail and wire fraud, aggravated identity theft and conspiracy, according to court documents. He filed motions to suppress evidence collected against him and said his Fourth Amendment rights were violated when law enforcement used a “stingray” device to locate his home. You can use the United States v. Read the resolution submitted by Rigmaiden here.

Rigmaiden was portrayed on the show as a controversial character who says he committed crimes because he disagreed with the system. He explained on the show that he filed tax returns for those who died and collected money sent by the government. His requests uncovered surveillance tactics that give law enforcement officers information about innocent people trying to apprehend criminals, activists on the show said.

Here’s what you need to know:


Rigmaiden was sentenced to 68 months in prison and now works as a consultant

Rigmaiden is now based in Phoenix, Arizona, and consults with the ACLU on the use of Stingray devices. After his release, he helped draft a bill on stingrays.

“When State Assemblyman David Taylor proposed a bill that would change how police obtain permission to use a controversial cell phone surveillance device, one Arizona resident took note.” The News Tribune wrote. “Since then, Daniel Rigmaiden has helped refine the bill’s definition of a cell site simulator, a device commonly referred to by its brand name, the Stingray. The law reached its final milestone on Monday when it was passed by state senators from the Law and Justice Committee.”

Campbell was sentenced to 68 months in prison or served time in his case. He was also ordered to do 100 hours of community service, forfeit the money he illegally earned, and submit to three years of supervised release. according to the US Department of Justice.


A U.S. District Judge denied Rigmaiden’s request for suppression of evidence but said his requests were “thoroughly researched and factually detailed”

Rigmaiden submitted “hundreds of pages of motions and exhibits” to argue his case, which reached US District Judge David Campbell United States vs. Rigmaiden. Campbell denied the request for suppression of evidence but discussed the research and details in the court filings.

“Although the defendant Rigmaiden represents himself and has no formal legal training, his filings and memoranda are thoroughly researched and factually detailed,” Campbell wrote in his order.

The judge wrote that the court procedures mentioned in the motions did not relate to search warrants, while Rigmaiden and the ACLU argued that the methods should have been spelled out more clearly in the search warrant motion.

“The defendant and the ACLU insist that the government was required to include a more detailed description in its warrant application because cell phone simulators are a new and potentially invasive technology,” Campbell wrote. “The ACLU cites cases where a judge denied the government’s request for use of a cell site simulator, but in each of those cases the requests were made based on legal authority and not, as here, on a probable cause warrant. ”

Campbell concluded that Rigmaiden’s Fourth Amendment rights were not violated.

He wrote:

The defendant has not shown that he had a legitimate expectation of privacy in his home, laptop or Aircard. The defendant has not demonstrated that his Fourth Amendment rights have been violated or, if a violation has occurred, that suppression is the appropriate remedy. The good faith exception applies to the disputed areas of the Government’s investigation, including the use of the mobile tracking device pursuant to a Rule 41 warrant.

The defendant in this case has filed literally dozens of motions, many seeking suppression or some other form of sanction against the government. The court has patiently tried to deal with each of the pro se defendant’s requests, but it is time to settle the government’s allegations on the merits. The defendant should make no further requests for suppression or sanctions based on the government’s searches in this case or its pre-trial submission of findings to the defendant.

CONTINUE READING: Justin Rapp Now: Where is the cop today in 2022?

https://heavy.com/entertainment/daniel-rigmaiden-now/ Daniel Rigmaiden Now: Where Does He Stand Today in 2022?

Brian Ashcraft

TheHiu.com is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, all materials to their authors. If you are the owner of the content and do not want us to publish your materials, please contact us by email – admin@thehiu.com. The content will be deleted within 24 hours.

Related Articles

Back to top button