Did you read the article? He destroyed the remains of the plane AFTER the FAA explicitly told him to not even touch it.
Sure, no evidence, no crime, but in this case there was evidence that the feds knew about. If you destroy the evidence before the cops know it exists, fair game. But this wasn't it.
As usual, the coverup is worse than the crime. Especially for the guy getting railroaded.
Being asked to not do it is not prereq to being charged. Even if the FAA didn’t ask, he could still be charged and prosecuted for the same crime. Its against law to destroy evidence of a crime but you don’t need to prove the crime actually existed. They could have said he was drug smuggling and still charged with obstruction of justice for the same act.
> The penalty for destroying this evidence should not exceed the original crime or value of the property I destroyed in any rational way.
The rational reason is that this is a behaviour we want to discourage. We want to diacourage it because it makes it more complicated and more costly to catch criminals, and more likely for them to get away with their crimes.
So if I lift a candy bar at a 7-11, am detained and questioned and the investigator notices chocolate smudges on my cheeks and uses that as reason to have my stomach pumped to produced destroyed evidence after I claimed I didn’t eat it, they can stick me in the slammer for 20 years for lying and destroying evidence?
There is the idea of commensurate punishment. 20 years for destroying evidence for something that while serious didn’t defraud anyone, maim anyone or cause damage I think is unreasonable and unconstitutional.
And here is where the reporting of these number goes wrong. The youtuber in question won’t go to jail for 20 years. You as the chocolate thief won’t go to jail for 20 years.
20 year is the absolute maximum for the worst evidence tampering you can think of. A serial offender, after knowingly and willingly leveling a city block with people in there the second time to hide his street gang’s accounting fraud, and exhibiting open contempt towards the judge while loudly proclaiming he will do it again after they let him out. That person can not get more than 20 years for the specific crime of evidence tampering. That is what the 20 years statutory maximum is.
Definitely disagree here. In the system you’re proposing it’s a no-brainer to tamper with evidence: you won’t end up worse than you are and might even get out of it entirely! You’re basically incentivizing criminals to tamper with evidence—you clearly didn’t think this through.
Sure, no evidence, no crime, but in this case there was evidence that the feds knew about. If you destroy the evidence before the cops know it exists, fair game. But this wasn't it.
As usual, the coverup is worse than the crime. Especially for the guy getting railroaded.