Reply #12: I think that is alluding to the intent issue. Did berger's sloppiness [View All]

[merh]

equate to a crime if he did not realize he was breaking the law or the rules by removing the documents? Did Berger intend to take the docs without approval?

Does that equate to:

Did whoever it was that leaked Plame's identity and the fact that she was an intelligence agent know that it was against the law to release the information? What intent did the leaker have and is that relevant.

Does intent negate either crime? That is the issue they are trying to stir up. Will lack of intent nullify Berger's guilt? If it does, why won't it negate the guilt of whoever leaked the Plame info?

Admin is pulling the tadpole game, they are mudding up the water and making the issues hard to see.

I am not sure if there are published jury instructions that discuss these crimes and I am not sure if intent is essential to convict of the crime(s) or if good faith is a defense.