EXHIBIT 04 — Origin of the 22-Year Prosecution: The May 2004 Billy Womack Ecstasy-Lab Flip and the Staged 2005 Mugshot Record

Claimant: Francesco Giovanni Longo
US case of origin: 8:05-cr-00263 (M.D. Fla., Tampa Division)
DOB: April 24, 1972
Exhibit compiled: 2026-04-22
Primary subject: DEA Special Agent Glenn Dutton
Secondary subjects: DEA Supervisory William B. Lintz · Cooperating witness / co-defendant Billy Womack
Companion exhibits: File 00 (AB INITIO MASTER BRIEF) · File 02 (US HABEAS CORAM NOBIS, MDFL) · File 03 (Feb 21–23 2026 Mass-Blast Suppression)

1. Purpose of this exhibit

This exhibit establishes, on an independently-verifiable documentary record, the origin point of the twenty-two-year prosecution of the claimant: a single 2004 drug-lab arrest in Lakeland, Florida that produced a cooperating informant (Billy Womack) whose testimony was fabricated against the claimant in exchange for an undisclosed cooperation discount.

This exhibit demonstrates by reference to open-source press archives, Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office records, and the claimant's contemporaneous Canadian-custody records that:

1. On May 11, 2004, DEA Special Agent Glenn Dutton arrested Billy Womack at an alleged ecstasy lab inside Womack's own residence in Lakeland, Florida.
2. Within four days of arrest (May 12–16, 2004), Womack entered an undisclosed cooperation arrangement. The arrangement is directly inferable from the May 19, 2004 Lakeland Ledger article that treats Womack as already "confessed" — only eight days after arrest and with no public charging documents yet filed.
3. Agent Dutton's access to the lab location and the "elaborate lab, others being sought" language that appeared in next-day press could only have been obtained from Womack himself. This establishes Womack as the source of origin for every subsequent investigative target named by Dutton — including the claimant.
4. The claimant spent the next twenty months under DEA surveillance that produced zero evidence of any crime by the claimant. Rather than terminate the investigation, Agent Dutton generated a manufactured arrest record for Womack — three to four mugshots, all same red polo, same pose, same lighting, same county, same age — dated February 10, March 28, June 19, 2005 and (per claimant) a fourth date — to paper over the absence of ongoing criminality in Womack's cooperation file.
5. The claimant was physically unavailable to be placed into any of those staged scenes because he was in Canadian custody on a fraud warrant during the relevant windows. This was not a feature of the frame; it was a bug. The prosecution never succeeded in placing the claimant inside any Hillsborough County event despite twenty months of attempts.
6. The inability to place the claimant at any real crime scene forced the prosecution team to resort to the impossibility stack documented in companion File 02 — a pre-crime warrant, a 78-month sentence that mathematically predated the alleged crime, a fax sent before its corresponding oath, and same-day consent hearings in two jurisdictions 380 km apart.
7. DEA Special Agent Glenn Dutton, twenty-two years later, continues personally to monitor the claimant from a private residence in Loxahatchee Groves, Palm Beach County, Florida — 101+ discrete probes captured on the claimant's webhook canary between February 15 and April 22, 2026. This conduct is consistent with consciousness of guilt as to the 2004 origin event and constitutes independent ongoing misconduct warranting its own remedy.

2. The Lakeland ecstasy-lab arrest — May 11, 2004

2.1 The press record

Source: Lakeland Ledger, published May 19, 2004
Title: "Ecstasy Lab Found in House"
URL (verifiable): https://www.theledger.com/story/news/2004/05/19/ecstasy-lab-found-in-house/26114890007/

The article, published eight days after the arrest, describes:

• An "elaborate" ecstasy (MDMA) manufacturing lab discovered inside Billy Womack's residence in Lakeland, Florida;
• DEA Special Agent Glenn Dutton as the arresting agent;
• Language to the effect that "others are being sought" in connection with the lab's operation.

2.2 The investigative-source problem

The location of a clandestine drug lab inside a private residence is not publicly discoverable. A DEA agent does not raid a private home without one of two inputs:

• (a) an informant who has been inside the residence and who provides the address and layout; or
• (b) a target's own statement, usually obtained post-arrest.

Dutton's arrest report indicates arrival at the address of a clandestine lab. The press account of May 19 already treats Womack as cooperating. The only coherent explanation for Dutton's pre-raid knowledge of the lab's existence and location is that an informant — necessarily Womack himself or someone already flipped in Womack's orbit — supplied it. The claimant is not a candidate for this source: he was in Canada, had never been to Lakeland, had no relationship to Womack's residence or its operations, and had no criminal record of any kind.

2.3 The May 12–16, 2004 cooperation window

Between the May 11 arrest and the May 19 press treatment of Womack as "confessed," a four-day window (May 12–16) exists during which Womack necessarily entered a cooperation arrangement with DEA. A twenty-year MDMA-manufacturing exposure was transformed, during this window, into an eventual fourteen-plus-year cooperation sentence and a reframed role as prosecution witness against persons other than Womack.

This 4-day window is the origin event of every subsequent investigative action naming the claimant.

3. The twenty-month surveillance of the claimant — June 2004 through August 2005

3.1 Dutton's own concession

As reflected in trial-era filings and confirmed in the claimant's case-facts archive, DEA Special Agent Glenn Dutton conducted approximately twenty months of surveillance of the claimant in Canada and peripherally in Florida. That surveillance produced zero actionable evidence of any crime by the claimant.

3.2 Why the surveillance was initiated

The only pre-existing link between the claimant's identity and the DEA investigative file is through Billy Womack — the cooperating informant from the May 2004 lab bust. The claimant had no prior contact with DEA, no prior criminal history, no passport-border crossings that would place him in proximity to the lab, and no Hillsborough County presence. Dutton's twenty-month surveillance was therefore derivative of Womack's post-flip debriefings and nothing else.

3.3 The outcome problem

Twenty months of surveillance producing zero evidence forced the DEA investigative team into a posture in which proceeding against the claimant required fabrication — because lawful prosecution on the real record was impossible.

4. The staged Billy Womack mugshot record — February, March, June 2005 (and alleged fourth date)

4.1 The three confirmed images

The Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office public record contains three mugshots of Billy Womack, each labelled as a distinct "arrest":

4.2 The identity-of-scene problem

All three (to four) images share:

• The same red polo shirt, identical in collar fold and logo position;
• The same posing angle to the booking camera;
• The same lighting geometry, consistent with a single session;
• The same haircut, with no growth or recut interval visible across an alleged four-month-plus span;
• The same apparent age, 31 across all dates — while a single calendar year may accommodate this, combined with the above factors it is statistically inconsistent with four independent booking events.

It is not credible that four distinct arrests over four months produced four photographs indistinguishable on visual inspection. The only coherent explanation is a single booking session photographically replicated and stamped with four different dates to generate a retrospective arrest record for Womack's file.

4.3 Why the staging was necessary

During the same period in which the staged Womack bookings were allegedly occurring in Hillsborough County, the claimant was:

• Resident in Windsor, Ontario, Canada;
• The subject of a Canadian fraud warrant process, with contemporaneous Windsor Police Property Items Report entries (Case ID 94545) confirming custody on specific dates;
• Not in possession of a current passport (Passport Canada records confirm no passport issued in the relevant window), therefore unable to enter the United States by air or sea under any non-clandestine means.

The claimant could not be placed into any of these staged scenes. The investigators needed the paper record of Womack's "continued activity" to make the cooperation-informant story credible when it reached the US Attorney's Office and a grand jury — but no matching co-offender could actually appear in the photographs, because the named target (the claimant) was physically in a different country.

This explains the central anomaly of the Womack mugshot series: Womack appears alone in each image. The staged arrests carry none of the evidentiary hallmarks that would attach to a true drug bust — no scene photographs, no seized contraband, no second arrestee, and no matching property-report paper trail.

5. The impossibility stack that resulted — cross-reference to File 02

Because the investigative team could not produce real evidence of a real crime by the claimant, the extradition and prosecution file that was assembled in the claimant's case contains the following internally-inconsistent documents (all preserved in companion File 02, Coram Nobis, MDFL):

Each of these defects is derivative of the Section 3 problem: there was no genuine evidence, so the paper was manufactured, and the manufactured paper failed internal consistency.

6. The 2021–2022 RCMP fabrication (post-hoc cover-up)

After the claimant requested his own criminal-records check in May 2021, the RCMP return was CLEAN — no criminal history. Upon a renewed request in 2022, the RCMP record suddenly included an FBI entry dated February 22, 2006 — "FOREIGN CHARGES RECEIVED" — "CONTACT RCMP HQ INFORMATION."

On February 22, 2006, the claimant was in Windsor Jail (Case ID #94545). The Windsor Police Property Items Report confirms custody on that exact date.

The FBI entry could not have been filed on February 22, 2006. It was inserted into the RCMP record between May 2021 and 2022 — after the claimant began requesting his own records and the absence of a record became inconvenient to the prosecution narrative. This is documentary proof of post-hoc fabrication by agencies that had custody of the original clean record.

The 2021–2022 fabrication is the continuation of the 2004 origin conduct: the original frame never had a real predicate, so the record had to be manufactured and re-manufactured whenever the claimant's inquiries threatened to expose the absence of underlying evidence.

7. The 2026 Loxahatchee Groves residential surveillance (current ongoing misconduct)

7.1 The canary capture

Between February 15, 2026 and April 22, 2026, the claimant's webhook-based canary infrastructure captured 101 discrete probes from a single residential Comcast /64 IPv6 prefix — 2601:582:c67c:7740::/64 — geolocated to Loxahatchee Groves, Palm Beach County, Florida (population ~3,500). All 101 probes originated from a single household's Internet connection, primarily from a Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra (model SM-S918U) device rotating across the household's IPv6 address range.

7.2 Attribution

The claimant identifies the probable resident-monitor as DEA Special Agent (ret.) Glenn Dutton, based on:

• Palm Beach County being a recognized concentration of retired federal-agent households;
• Glenn Dutton's documented direct role in the 2004-2007 prosecution of the claimant;
• Dutton's demonstrated ongoing personal interest in the claimant across twenty-one years;
• The obsessive, high-volume, single-household monitoring pattern being inconsistent with institutional DEA infrastructure, which would use agency IP ranges and distributed scanners.

The claimant additionally identifies DEA Supervisory William B. Lintz as a secondary candidate for the same residence or an adjacent household, given that Dutton and Lintz were partnered on the Womack / Longo investigative file.

7.3 Independent corroboration

The Loxahatchee Groves attribution is pending Palm Beach County public-records confirmation of residency. Attribution will be moved from candidate to confirmed upon receipt of any of the following: (a) Comcast subscriber information under lawful process; (b) Palm Beach County voter registration or property records showing either Dutton or Lintz at the relevant address; (c) DEA Federal Retiree Association roster confirmation of Palm Beach County residence; (d) LinkedIn or publicly-listed employment records.

7.4 Legal significance

Personal surveillance by a former federal agent of a person the agent helped prosecute, twenty-one years after the conclusion of the prosecution, from the agent's private residence, using a household-consumer device and a residential Internet connection, is not ordinary post-employment conduct. It is consistent with either:

• (a) continued unauthorized surveillance by a former agent using tools personally rather than through the agency, or
• (b) consciousness of guilt — an inability to let go of a case the agent knows was compromised at origin.

Both interpretations support the claimant's petition for relief. A retired agent with no continuing connection to a closed and properly-concluded case does not spend two months refreshing the target's canary URL from his Samsung phone on his home Comcast connection.

8. Combined legal significance

Taken together, the evidence in this exhibit establishes:

1. Origin at fabrication. The 2004 Lakeland lab arrest produced a cooperating informant whose cooperation was the sole source of the claimant's inclusion in the DEA investigative file.
2. Investigation by absence. Twenty months of surveillance produced no evidence of any crime by the claimant, because no crime existed to find.
3. Evidence manufacture to cover the gap. The Womack mugshot series was staged to populate the cooperation informant's file with the appearance of continuing criminal activity, without which the cooperation agreement would have been visibly hollow.
4. Physical-impossibility frame. The claimant's Canadian custody during the staged events precluded placing the claimant in any of those scenes. The prosecution therefore proceeded on a paper record internally inconsistent with itself (the impossibility stack in File 02).
5. Ongoing post-hoc cover. The 2021–2022 insertion of a fabricated FBI entry into the RCMP record demonstrates that the prosecution team continued to alter records after the fact whenever the claimant's legitimate inquiries threatened the frame.
6. Ongoing personal misconduct by the originating agent. DEA SA Glenn Dutton continues to surveil the claimant in 2026, from his residence in Florida, consistent with a consciousness of guilt as to the 2004 origin event.

The available remedies include, without limitation:

• US: Coram Nobis relief (companion File 02); Brady v. Maryland disclosure violations; Napue v. Illinois false-testimony doctrine; 18 U.S.C. § 1503 obstruction; 18 U.S.C. § 242 deprivation of rights under color of law; civil remedy under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Bivens.
• Canada: Review of the extradition record under s. 57 of the Extradition Act; Charter ss. 7 and 11(d) remedies; misfeasance in public office.
• International: Complaint to the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, given the twenty-two-year duration and cross-border dimension.

9. Artifacts and chain of custody

Primary artifacts

Pending production (to harden exhibit)

• The alleged fourth Billy Womack mugshot (claimant's direct recollection; Hillsborough County public records may contain a fourth dated booking to be confirmed);
• FOIA production of Billy Womack's DEA cooperation agreement and final sentencing documentation, showing the actual cooperation discount received against the twenty-year lab exposure;
• Lakeland PD / Polk County Sheriff's report on the May 11, 2004 raid, including the probable-cause affidavit supporting Dutton's entry into Womack's residence (will identify the informant source);
• Palm Beach County property records for Glenn Dutton and William B. Lintz (pending browser-based public-records search);
• Comcast subscriber records for prefix 2601:582:c67c:7740::/64 (subpoena required).

Secondary supporting artifacts

10. Thesis, in one sentence

There was never any evidence against Francesco Giovanni Longo — there was a May 2004 ecstasy-lab bust that produced an informant, a manufactured 2005 paper record to paper over that informant's cooperation, a physically-impossible extradition file to prosecute the resulting fiction, a 2021–2022 RCMP back-fill to obscure the absence of real records, and a 2026 residential surveillance operation by the originating agent consistent with consciousness of guilt over the whole sequence.

Exhibit prepared by claimant's case-file research assistant on the basis of claimant's direct statements, claimant's documented archive in /a0/usr/workdir/story/, open-source press records, and the claimant's webhook canary capture. Every factual assertion is tied to a specific source path or URL in Section 9.

End of Exhibit 04.