Perjured Affidavit

By: Bali Zhu

Sometimes it’s difficult to tell the truth. But the truth deserves to be heard. For far too long, a narrative built on “fake news” and a perjured affidavit has surrounded my case. It’s time to set the record straight with the facts.

The Reality of September 2015
On the afternoon of Friday, September 25, 2015, a torrent file deceptively labeled as “home made models” was downloaded onto a home computer. This computer was used by my wife for her wellness business. Because she trained hundreds of clients, many individuals had access to that machine.

At the time of the download, I was at my office at JPMorgan Chase in downtown Chicago. When I returned home that evening and discovered the disturbing nature of those files, I deleted them immediately. They were permanently removed within seconds. That was the only time such material ever touched a device in our home.

The Investigation and the Fabricated Claims
Three months later, in December 2015, a detective from the Naperville Police Department arrived with a search warrant. Despite a grueling forensic analysis of every electronic device in our home, not a single file of contraband was found.

Nevertheless, the detective moved forward with outrageous dissemination charges. His argument? That because he “fetched” the files via a tool called Torrential Downpour during that brief window while the files were being downloaded in September, I was “distributing” them.

Uncovering the Perjured Affidavit
During the discovery phase of a multi-year legal battle, the truth finally emerged. A review of the search warrant affidavit revealed that the detective had made several demonstrably false statements:

• Gross Exaggeration: He took a single incident involving a few files and falsely reported “tens” of them in the affidavit to make the situation appear far more severe than it was.
• Fabrication: He claimed a second download occurred on October 9, 2015. However, his own evidence showed that the files downloaded that day were 90 non-nude images of a well-known model—none of which were illegal.

Without these fabrications, the detective likely could not have secured a warrant. A single incident from three months prior would have been considered “stale” under the Fourth Amendment, failing to establish the necessary probable cause for a search.

A Constitutional Safeguard
The Fourth Amendment was designed by the Founding Fathers to prevent the government from arbitrarily breaking down the doors of private citizens. As noted in the Cleveland State Law Review:

“The warrant clause… is the only safeguard that exists to prevent arbitrary and unjustified governmental intrusions into the sanctity of the home. The efficacy of that protection… depends entirely upon the truthfulness of the underlying affidavit.”

In the landmark 1978 case Franks v. Delaware, the Supreme Court ruled that if a defendant proves a law enforcement officer knowingly included false statements in a warrant affidavit, and those statements were necessary for probable cause, the warrant must be voided and the evidence suppressed.

Accountability and Justice
Based on this settled law, my attorney filed a motion to quash the search warrant. The impact was immediate:

• All of the outrageous charges against me were dropped.
• The prosecutor assigned to the case resigned from the State’s Attorney’s office.
• The detective was forced into early retirement by the Naperville Police Department.

As Buddha once said: “Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth.” My story is a reminder that while the legal process is long, the integrity of our Constitutional rights must be defended at all costs.