You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] laikaislost ago 

knowing that some of the information she received might be classified, constitutes gross negligence

No it doesn't. Gross negligence is a different standard. Go read up on it. Wiki has some good starting points. Cornell has good archives and a fully functional search feature.

However, somehow that does not qualify as "gross negligence" under 18 USC 793.

See above.

He did not explain how that could be the case

He did address it indirectly if you paid attention. He referenced a case that had gross negligence. http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2016/07/heres-the-other-gross-negligence-case-comey-cited-in-clinton-email-testimony-225266

1
-1

[–] intrepiddemise 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago  (edited ago)

The FBI said in court filings that Smith carried classified documents and other sensitive records in his briefcase and sometimes left the case open and unattended while he visited her residence.

If you know anything about cybersecurity, then you know that having any classified material on an unprotected server constitutes gross negligence. To me, these two cases are very similar. Having that material on an unprotected server is the same as leaving those documents out in an unprotected room.

edit: and btw, murder does require intent. Without intent, the charge is manslaughter.