welsch@houxu.UUCP (Larry Welsch) (04/26/84)
Tampering with evidence! Specifically Richard Nixon erased parts of the infamous Watergate Tapes, which were evidence for criminal prosecution and his impeachment proceeding in the House Judicial Committee. This is against the LAW. The tapes themselves contained evidence of many violations, such as conspiracy, pay offs, etc. Larry
wetcw@pyuxa.UUCP (T C Wheeler) (04/27/84)
[] Exactly how would you go about proving such a charge? Since the tapes (one) were not evidence at the time of the supposed tampering, but the property of Mr. Nixon, how would you go about charging Nixon with tampering with his own property which was not evidence? Any court would throw this one out. Let's hear some more. Be careful though, separate the wishes and dreams from the reality of events. T. C. Wheeler
welsch@houxu.UUCP (Larry Welsch) (04/28/84)
The tapes were subpoenaed by House Judiciary Committee and were evidence in the impeachment proceedings at the time that Nixon destroyed the evidence. Yes that was a crime. The tapes themselves contained evidence that Nixon participated in a conspiriacy to cover up the crimes of others, another crime under federal law. I grant Nixon was never convicted of any crime. However, it is clear that Nixon plea bargained, he was in the process of being impeached and being brought to trial, at the time that left office. I have little doubt that had Ford not pardoned Nixon or had Nixon not left office he would have been impeached and found guilty. Larry Welsch houxu!welsch
alle@ihuxb.UUCP (Allen England) (04/28/84)
> Tampering with evidence! Specifically Richard Nixon erased parts of the > infamous Watergate Tapes, which were evidence for criminal prosecution and > his impeachment proceeding in the House Judicial Committee. This is > against the LAW. The tapes themselves contained evidence of many > violations, such as conspiracy, pay offs, etc. If it is agains the law, please explain to me how that government informer who turned in John DeLorean was allowed erase parts of the tapes used as evidence in court. This was admitted in court. --> Allen <-- ihnp4!ihuxb!alle
wetcw@pyuxa.UUCP (T C Wheeler) (04/30/84)
[] Sorry Larry, the tape (one) in question (the one with the missing 18 minutes) was done in way before the House JC called for it. There was nothing in the HJC's indicment about destroying evidence. Try again. T. C. Wheeler
jdb@qubix.UUCP (Jeff Bulf) (05/01/84)
Relevant to the debate, I think ...
"When the president does it, that means that it is not not against the law."
- R Nixon.
PS The above is strictly from memory. The context was post-watergate. Anybody
got more specifics on context, sources, and wording?
--
Dr Memory
...{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!decwrl!qubix!jdbjdb@qubix.UUCP (Jeff Bulf) (05/01/84)
Apologies for sloppy proofreading on my Nixon quote. "not not" should have been
"not"
--
Dr Memory
...{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!decwrl!qubix!jdb