In France we had a case where the government tried to bring terrorist charges against someone, the problem is that the police couldn’t materially have seen what they wrote in their report, because their car was too far and the timing didn’t line up correctly. Eventually the policemen invoked confidentiality rules against their mobile phones so that no accurate probing could be made. The judge threw away the terrorist charges anyways, because the facts didn’t warrant it. Since the police knew exact facts without being there, there is a high suspicion they used illegal spying on the people and tried to launder the data.

Can you elaborate on these points? I would love to read more.

Having graduated from a police academy, I was greatly surprised that the reason that most criminals (at least in the US) do incredibly stupid things that make it almost trivial to catch them.

In the original Dunning-Kruger paper, one bad guy thought that since rubbing lemon juice on his face made his eyes blurry, he felt that it also made cameras blurry.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

I find it amusing to watch sovereign citizen videos. One of their failures is that they think that "law" is magic. All they have to do is utter the correct recipe of magic spells/words/red ink/stamps and they will be able to force the legal system to bend to their wishes.

> they were controlled by a police officer

I'm reminded of the COINTELPRO program run by the FBI in the 1960s. On more than one occasion, every participant in the "terrorist cell" (modern term - the common one in use back then was "subversive group") were FBI informants attempting to implicate the other members of the cell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO