Jo-Anna Nieves

go on these long excursions.

And all of her community members who really know her are going to help paint that picture so that the police don't get tunnel vision just going down one avenue, but they're able to take that aggregated and make a conscious decision about where to target that investigation.

Right, Nancy.

So I do believe that it does outline what the target of this investigation is.

It's not just trying to uncover who it may be and get more information.

Obviously, they're trying to focus their energies on identifying incriminating information against this particular person that's named in

the footnote there in the charging document, assuming that that was cited properly.

I would guess that they took that from the grand jury subpoena that was received.

The filing itself, I think, is kind of more procedural, right?

They're in Texas, this is happening in California, and it's their...

their attempt to say, you know what, I don't really feel like California can drag me over there based on this subpoena.

And I want a court to say that, yes, absolutely.

You have to you have the authority to make me come and testify.

So I think it's kind of like one of those procedural things where

you're contesting the validity of a confidential informant or you're contesting the validity of a warrant or the validity of a search.

They're really just saying, hey, just make sure that you really do have the arm's reach to make me come from Texas to California here.

I think we see this pretty often though.

Like, Hey, you, there are rules that you have to follow.

There is information that we need.

Give me proper notice.