Is this a viable prosecution strategy?

Is this a viable prosecution strategy: Avoid discovery. Parallel construct case based on knowledge obtained through spyware. Craft a suspiciously precise network investigative technique based on the subject's habits. Rely on known frowning by judges to avoid anyone going to the media. Even if anyone went to the media, the media is biased against actually saying anything. Rely on an argument to the jury that "this is legal, we have a warrant to do this, based on our extensive knowledge, this particular set of habits is actually common, no we don't comment on our procedures, that is a political question." This does seem self evidently absurd. Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email.