The issue being, the premises were previously searched under a search warrant, nothing was found, a secondary search at a later date was which FF claims was not done under a search warrant, did the woman police officer compromise the chain of custody by digging up the sd cards etc with out warrant or was it done as part of a search?
I don't think the issue is chain of custody - i think FF is trying to attack probable cause. We are groping in the dark a bit because we don't have the detailed reporting yet.
I think what he is suggesting is that the police woman pulled a fast one by conducting an illegal search to find something suspicious, then arranging for a civilian to 'find' it and call it in. Then they have cause for the big search. Obviously you can't do that.
It might be hard to prove that of course.
However this would explain a lot about the hold up in the MM case. They worry that the search won't stand up, but they can use the knowledge gained there to try to find the hard evidence that will stand up.
IMO this issue is likely not that important for the HaB case.