• state_electrician
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 years ago

    I mean, who wouldn’t? Most people don’t commit crimes, which is of course the right way. But if you do, only idiots create any evidence in the first place, but only complete idiots leave that evidence around for law enforcement to find.

    • athos77@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 years ago

      Agreed. But most people were never the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, who specialized in taking down hard-to-get-at groups using RICO laws - someone who knows in exacting detail what those laws are and how they can be applied. He knew better than to leave evidence in the first place, and doubly knew that getting rid of it was an especially bad idea of the investigation was at all serious.

      • emeralddawn45
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 years ago

        I mean he failed to comply with discovery subpoenas. To me that says that he was more concerned with what might turn up than he was with having to pay damages in this case. If he loses this but avoids larger legal cases because of it that may be shady but I wouldn’t call it stupid.

        • athos77@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          True. But Iirc (it’s hard to keep track) he’s an unnamed coconspirator in one of the federal cases, and I think destroying that evidence works more against him there.

      • state_electrician
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        He is obviously an idiot, because he’s creating evidence left and right. With these people I think it’s a mix of stupidity and hubris. They got away with so much crap, they think they’ll get away with everything.