At least now he has time to focus on his family rather than spend all day and night in machine gun mode on here.

I don't care about that.

A WAN IP address cannot prove that a specific person performed online activity. At best, it identifies an internet connection, not a human being.

IP attribution is circumstantial evidence only. Courts have repeatedly acknowledged this — an IP is not like DNA, and even stronger identifiers (fingerprints, biometrics, device IDs) can be spoofed or misattributed. That’s why cases relying solely on IP evidence are often dismissed.

Multiple scenarios break IP = person:

Shared households, guests, employees

Compromised routers or networks

Malware or unauthorized devices

ISP reassignment / CGNAT

Unknown third-party use of the connection

Even if activity genuinely originates from a subscriber’s WAN IP, investigators still must prove who generated it, using corroborating evidence (devices, accounts, payments, physical presence). Without that, the conclusion is simply “unknown actor on this network,” not guilt.

IP addresses are leads — not identity, not intent, and not proof.