The right to destroy evidence?
Don’t think so, obsruction of justice would be unenforceable. The common law is clear that no one has the right to destroy evidence simply because it’s incriminating to an accused.
The malice in his actions is as clear as day. So nor “prank.” It was an effort to defame her and obstruct her right to free speech.
Well perhaps obstruction of justice charges should be limited to the severity of the root crime.
It's just ridiculous to me that if you cover your tracks after committing a misdemeanor, that you become a felon for covering your tracks when you were only trying to cover up a misdemeanor.
The flip side of this is that we now know that we should never say anything to law enforcement. Because if they can construe something you said as false, they they can get you for obstruction of justice, whether or not you are guilty of any crime. (ex Martha Stewart)