Wait till statisticians find a correlation between downloading pictures of cats and zoophilia... And if they can't find evidence against you, that shows you are even more perfidious: you must have destroyed it.

A prosecutor needs a REASONABLE initial suspicion based on facts that you have committed an offence. If they can prove that you have bought booze and have no hint that you bought illegal substances, the judge MUST NOT issue a search warrant. (You can't dispute a search warrant except retroactively, by the way.)

Here is a professor of criminal law, very upset, finding clear words, dissecting this outrage better than I can, although interviewed with shockingly prejudiced questions. She calls the behaviour of the prosecution illegal and a violation of fundamental rights.

His behaviour may be improper (what is he doing with pictures of naked minors?) but propriety must not interest the prosecution or the judge. There is no hint that he broke the law. That's all that counts.