Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
This intellectual and legal research exercise should commence with a brief review of the basics of criminal jurisprudence: There are two elements of a criminal offense: the prohibited conduct as defined in statute; and the mens rea or mental intent of the individual or individuals engaging in the prohibited conduct. Thus, to gain a conviction on a criminal count in an indictment, a prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that: (1) the prohibited conduct occurred, (2) the prohibited conduct was undertaken by the defendant, and (3) the defendant had the requisite mens rea or intent at the time.
Read more: Eight Laws Hillary Clinton Could Be Indicted For Breaking | The Daily Caller
I didn't feel like reading the whole article. Does this apply to Hillary's charges? |
Fortunately, there is NO requirement for "intent" in the commission of many crrimes, as listed in a post above. I believe mens rea means that there is a knowledge of the law at the time. Remember the old saying that ignorance of the law is no excuse? Hillary can not clam ignorance of the law because she signed SF312 CLASSIFIED INFORMATION NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT. The only requirement of the FBI will be proof that a violation occurred and that Hillary was the perpetrator of the violation. No intent will be required for some of the crimes she committed. And I do not say "alleged" to have committed because proof is all over the Internet with copies of her emails. So, she is guilty of some crimes. Now, it is up to the FBI to present a case to the Attorney General, Obama's AG. The FBI can present indisputable evidence and the AG can decide not to prosecute it, or Obama can pardon her. Either way, I doubt anyone will ever see justice and the libtards will continue to deny that she did wrong. But, she will pay ultimately. If not now, then later.