I am looking for a statutory legal opinion. Not trying to be rude, but I would like to hear this from a lawyer or legal scholar.?

Question

Wikileaks claims that after the subpoena was issued to retain and turn over all of her private server emails that Hillary ordered all emails more than 60 days old to be deleted.

Also, her people ordered all emails between her and POTUS sent under a pseudonym he was using to be deleted.

Let's say for sake of argument Wikileaks is accurate.

Would this not be a conspiracy to destroy physical evidence ordered retained and to be turned over to the court?  Whether it was personal or professional emails shouldn't matter should it?

Also, doesn't POTUS using a pseudonym show an attempt to circumvent FOIA statutes?

I here all kinds of conjecture on these issues and would like to nail down some facts.  What is it going to take to finally put this women in jail where she belongs?

rickinnocal · Answer

It would depend on the actual language of the subpoena, which I have not seen. If the subpoena called for all emails to be handed over, rather than all 'government related' or all 'official' emails, then deleting emails subject to the subpoena would be contempt of court.

Conspiracy charges would be unlikely though. In 'most' cases conspiracy as a crime only applies to conspiring to commit or conceal a felony, and contempt of court is usually just a misdemeanor.

Richard

william c · Answer

Sorry I didn't put my actual question where it belonged.  It was simply to long.

Anonymous · Answer

What is the question?

Trending News

I am looking for a statutory legal opinion. Not trying to be rude, but I would like to hear this from a lawyer or legal scholar.?

3 Answers