|
I have mixed opinions. Quite honestly. I fear (and this is not an original idea on my part) that it will be some sort of obstruction charge based on a technicality. Something like "We asked you if you had spoken with this person in November of 2002 and you said you couldn't remember, but we have your phone records and you did.".
Something like that would be disturbing to me because it will be the same thing they did to Martha Stewart.
The prosecutors could not prove she committed a crime, so they prosecuted the supposed cover up of the crime that they couldn't prove she committed. That is very dangerous.
In the future, does that mean that when anyone is accused of a crime by the government, the case will be "we cannot prove it, and because we cannot prove it, we are sure you are covering it up, so you will go to jail for the obstruction charge."
That is scary.
|