And yet fraudulent warrants, if they are indeed fraudulent, are still illegal and immoral and a violation of this criminal's rights.

As far as i can discern, the warrants aren't fraudulent.

Warrants (in the US anyway) require reasonable belief that the crimes listed were committed.

They don't have to be right, mind you (after all, that's what trial is for), they just need reasonable belief.

They also can't recklessly disregard the truth (IE deliberately write lies they know are wrong).

Again, it's okay for them to be wrong about their belief. It's just not okay to know they are wrong and write it anyway.

Here, reading the warrant, etc, there is nothing obviously fraudulent here.

Perhaps it is, of course, but i read everything i could find and it's completely non-obvious which part of the warrant is supposed to be fraudulent.

Even the sort of retaliation claim made here is strange - Arresting you when you appear to actually hvae broken the law is generally only considered retaliation if (among other things) the enforcement of the law is uneven - IE targeted at you and nobody else.

Given the arrest was for a parole violation and they arrest parole violations like this all the time, ....

Like if you are at a traffic stop becuase you ran a red light, call a cop an asshole, and they arrest you because you have 50kg of cocaine bricks in your back seat, it's not retaliation.

Retaliation would be if you call a cop an asshole on facebook, and they come arrest you for violation of an 1825 law that hasn't been used against anyone in 200 years.