>>tafda+(OP)
Curiously, the charge he pled guilty to as part of the plea deal has nothing to do with planes. He pled guilty to obstructing a federal investigation (of the crash). Makes sense. Proving his intent w.r.t. the crash back then would be harder than proving that he DID remove the wreck and subsequently destroyed it.
>>dmitry+63
I dunno. I believe the guy is guilty and should be punished for recklessness, etc. but I don’t like it when authorities rely on indirect charges to “get” someone.
Prove the original crime, don’t rely and peripheral procedure like “they lied to a federal agent” (uhh) cop-out. Do your job.
Likewise I’m not don’t of people getting off on “technicalities” (Some more than others)
>>jkubic+I5
Why? Do police officers get fired or lose money when technicalities free criminals? If so, why couldn't we just keep that part and not release the criminals on the technicality?
>>ALittl+H6
If we didn't let people go on technicalities, then there'd be no consequence for the government violating people's rights in investigations.