So...obstruction.https://twitter.com/jkarsh/status/845318523597434880 …
-
-
The legal standard is "knew or should have known" it was material to an ongoing investigation.
-
applied in this context, it would likely fail for vagueness and overbreadth, since no crime has been identified
-
Unless the person knows a crime was committed because they were involved. The nature of digital comms make it
-
highly likely a copy will surface, which adds obstruction to conspiracy and whatever crime was under investigtn
-
the point-there is no crime until someone in law enforcement names a statute violated.
-
That statement is insane. You're saying if I murder someone and PD havent found the body, no crime occurred?
-
Nobody has to name a crime for the criminal acts to become known. The conspirators know of the crime.
-
and destroying contents of one's own property does not constitute "tampering" ipso facto
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.