I can believe this, but what if an account was hacked? They always have to take that into account.
If anyone gets arrested based on a hacked social media account they can always use the innocence by virtue of demonstrable intelligence defense:
"I wouldn't be so stupid as to post [crime] on Twitter. If I were really a criminal, wouldn't it be more plausible for me to deliberately post false information on Twitter to lead you off the trail of the
real crime? After all, you're holding me for [crime]. What if I actually committed [highly probable alternate crime of superior consequence] and used [crime] as a cover on social media? My presence here is proof that such a tactic can be successfully employed. At least, theoretically. Furthermore, what if this entire series of questions is just misdirection intended to cast reasonable doubt on the matter at hand? Is that not a possibility? What if I told you that this – this building and the people in it – is all a lie? An act? A performance? What if I asked for my lawyer? What if I asked... For a sandwich?
So, you see, I'm clearly innocent. One cannot simultaneously be a bullshit artist and a *****."
Next we will arrest you based upon you social media postings.
They can already do that if said postings are deemed a threat to public safety.