A criminal probe launched by the Department of Justice into the Southern Poverty Law Center could be undone by one detail, a former federal prosecutor has claimed. Joyce Vance, who served as the United States attorney for the Northern District of Alabama from 2009 to 2017, believes the DOJ will have a hard time convincing people its investigation is just. The DoJ indicted the Southern Poverty Law Center on criminal fraud charges, alleging the civil rights organization misled donors about how contributions would be used. FBI Director Kash Patel and acting Attorney General Todd Blanche accused the SPLC of using donations to pay informants infiltrating extremist groups without disclosure. However, legal experts and former law enforcement officials have harshly criticized the prosecution.Vance wrote in her Substack, "The indictment rises or falls on one faulty premise: that you should look only at one piece of SPLC’s work to infiltrate these dangerous groups, not at their overall efforts to dismantle them. "DOJ predicates its wire fraud charges, which we discussed here, on the assumption that people who donated to SPLC would be unhappy that their dollars were used to fund paid informants who obtained inside information about what white supremacists and other groups were up to."DOJ uses tunnel vision to convince people—because that’s what this indictment is about, convincing the public before the case ever gets to trial — that the Southern Poverty Law Center is responsible for everything from the tragic violence at the Charlottesville 'Unite The Right' Rally during Trump’s first term in office to, well, who knows what all. "To hear acting AG Todd Blanche and FBI Director Kash Patel sell it in a very unusual press conference (that took place in Washington, D.C., without the U.S. Attorney who indicted the case in Montgomery, Alabama, present), SPLC is responsible for the rise of domestic violence in America today. "It’s ironic coming from the administration of a man who solicited his followers to come to Washington, D.C., on January 6 to fight for him, which they did. It’s easy to see how problematic that approach will be when it comes to a jury, which must unanimously go along with this flawed argument in order to convict."