[wideminded]

For example, the papers which contained handwritten notes in the margins,

I was surprised to read recently in the Wikipedia article on Sandy Berger, which quotes both the prosecutor and the National Archives inspector, there there were no handwritten notes on the documents removed by Berger. The prosecutor called this "an urban myth".

[Enchante]

The prosecutor called this "an urban myth".

The prosecutor (and everyone who has helped Sandy Burglar to slide) is dishonest, incompetent, corrupt, and/or downright STOOPID. Earth to DOJ: you have NO IDEA what the Burglar destroyed because you have only his utterly worthless 'word' about what he destroyed. He was rooting through non-inventoried items for at least two sessions before the National Archives staff even thought to try to record his mis-deeds. But use your feeble brain, DOJ-types, for what would Sandy Burglar be willing to risk his career, his finances, his very freedom????? Certainly not to destroy identical draft copies that revealed nothing embarrassing to the Clintonistas. Come on DOJ and MSM frauds, are you really as pathetic and STOOPID as you seem to be, or are you simply in on the Clintonista scam?

[Paloma_55]

The congressional report indicates that Berger had access to original documents. Original documents are often marked up to contain information that is not in the electronic document.

Like if I wrote a report and sent you a PDF copy. You print it, write comments on it, then hand it to someone else for them to review. They comment on it and pass it to someone else.

That document, with your handwriting on it is an "original document" but there is no electronic copy of it. This is what was stolen.

Now, did they have handwritten notes and what would those notes say? Nobody knows. Most likely, the prosecuter said something like "There is no evidence to prove that Berger destroyed such documents"...that is how they do it. No evidence.