As was stated, apparently this was sufficient to convince a judge that probable cause existed to issue a search warrant of a search for wherever it was they issued the warrant. Also, since you are here, I think we can assume that the police found evidence of criminal activity as a result of the search warrant, correct?
As pointed out, the affidavit for the search warrant need only show that there is probable cause to believe that a crime was committed and that evidence of that crime might be in the place where they are asking to search. Absolute certainty is NOT a requirement. The fact that there could be another interpretation of the event(s) does not mean that the affidavit was improper. Unless you can show that the affidavit was false and based on intentional and knowing lies, quashing the warrant will be near to impossible.
Admittedly, if that is the affidavit en toto (and no other supporting documents were submitted with the affidavit - and there might have been and you do not have them, then it is poorly formatted and lacks an assertation of the officer's training and experience. But it was apparently sufficient to pass muster with a judge. I imagine that your defense attorney will have nothing to lose by challenging the warrant at trial and praying he succeeds. Most do not, but you never know. The defense can also argue that the informant is the culprit if the facts can be twisted that way.
- Carl

