Memogate - Texas Penal Code - Heads Need to Roll

Texas Penal Code Sec. 37.10 ^ | September 20th, 2004 | The Finman

[The Finman]

---

quote:

---

Sec. 37.10. TAMPERING WITH GOVERNMENTAL RECORD.

(a) A person commits an offense if he:

~ ~ (1) knowingly makes a false entry in, or false alteration of, a governmental record;

~ ~ (2) makes, presents, or uses any record, document, or thing with knowledge of its falsity and with intent that it be taken as a genuine governmental record;

~ ~ (3) intentionally destroys, conceals, removes, or otherwise impairs the verity, legibility, or availability of a governmental record;

~ ~ (4) possesses, sells, or offers to sell a governmental record or a blank governmental record form with intent that it be used unlawfully;

~ ~ (5) makes, presents, or uses a governmental record with knowledge of its falsity; or

~ ~ (6) possesses, sells, or offers to sell a governmental record or a blank governmental record form with knowledge that it was obtained unlawfully.

~ (b) It is an exception to the application of Subsection (a)(3) that the governmental record is destroyed pursuant to legal authorization. With regard to the destruction of a local government record, legal authorization includes compliance with the provisions of Subtitle C, Title 6, Local Government Code.

~ (c) Except as provided in Subsection (d), an offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor unless the actor's intent is to defraud or harm another, in which event the offense is a state jail felony.

~ (d) [amended 5/21/97 & 9/1/97] An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree if it is shown on the trial of the offense that the governmental record was a license, certificate, permit, seal, title, letter of patent, or similar document issued by government, by another state, or by the United States, unless the actor's intent is to defraud or harm another, in which event the offense is a felony of the second degree.

~ (e) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution for possession under Subsection (a)(6) that the possession occurred in the actual discharge of official duties as a public servant.

~ (f) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(1), (a)(2), or (a)(5) that the false entry or false information could have no effect on the government's purpose for requiring the governmental record.

~ (g) A person is presumed to intend to defraud or harm another if the person acts with respect to two or more of the same type of governmental records or blank governmental record forms and if each governmental record or blank governmental record form is a license, certificate, permit, seal, title, or similar document issued by government.

~ (h) [added 5/21/97] If conduct that constitutes an offense under this section also constitutes an offense under Section 32.48 or 37.13, the actor may be prosecuted under any of those sections.


Eff 5/21/97 inserted in (d) "letter of patent," and eff 9/1/97 in (d) inserted ", by another state, or by the United States"; before 5/21/97 (d) provided:


~ (d) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree if it is shown on the trial of the offense that the governmental record was a license, certificate, permit, seal, title, or similar document issued by government, unless the actor's intent is to defraud or harm another, in which event the offense is a felony of the second degree.

http://www.bakers-legal-pages.com/pc/3710.htm

---

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

Thanks

[DestroytheDemocrats]

Yeah but the documents were from Killian's "personal files."

[dodger]

Actually, I thought from the outset that the DNC purposely forged 'private' documents to avoid exactly this sort of criminality. Still, some major crimes herein ... but no word on any criminal investigation.

[sarasotarepublican]

There is going to be NO criminal investigation. If there was to be, who would initiate it? Not the media, certainly not the democrats. I would never expect the Republicans to take such a stance. It will die on the vine. There are NO bernstein and woodwards in our party.
If there were, they would get NO co-operation.

[The Finman]

Both Burkett & Dan Rather are residents of Texas so that is why the Texas Penal Code is applicable, and while I doubt that it can be proved that Rather knowingly was in on the forgery, Burkett has admitted that he "deliberately misled" CBS news producer Mary Mapes.

If Burkett didn't forge the documents, then he knows who did, and the above penal code can be brought on him to give his source, and then upon the source itself.

[Anti-Bubba182]

I doubt if they do anything, but they should. Bukett neither admits producing the documents himself nor says where he got them. There should be a legal proceeding to find oout the details.

This affair was much more serious than a political dirty trick and should be treated accordingly.

[Wu]

Now, find some Peace Officer in Texas with no political affiliation to enforce the law.

[shield]

SEND IN THE TEXAS RANGERS!!!

[The Finman]

The above is the Texas Penal Code, not the Feds...which is why I hold out hope that this might be pursued. This is state violation and since this involves the Texas Air National Guard with the named source a Texas residence, there could be teeth here.

[deport]

Sec. 37.10. TAMPERING WITH GOVERNMENTAL RECORD.

---

Is any of the memos that Burkett' gave to CBS considered Government Record' or were they the private property of Killian.... makes a difference for the above referenced code, I'd think... Other sections of the code may apply.

[68skylark]

Here's the military charge of forgery, from the UCMJ:

923. ART. 123. FORGERY Any person subject to this chapter who, with intent to defraud- -

(1) falsely makes or alters any signature, to, or any part of, any writing which would, if genuine, apparently impose a legal liability on another or change his legal right or liability to his prejudice; or

(2) utters, offers, issues, or transfers such a writing, known by him to be so made or altered;

is guilty of forgery and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

I believe the UCMJ still applies to a retired officer, but I'm not sure if this charge would fit the circumstances of these documents.

[IamJustright]

Hope you don't mind. I sent this to 60 minutes Email 60II@cbsnews.com

[dodger]

It may well be no inquiry will occur. But it would certainly be reasonable were any 'controlling legal authority' in Texas (ranging from the Sheriff in Abilene on up ...) open an investigation. Perhaps after the election.

[The Finman]

Excellent!!

[Anti-Bubba182]

Hope you are right, but Burkett's lawyer is a Texas democrat bigshot and would scream partisan witchunt at the first sign of that. Sad to say, that might hold it off.

[pointsal]

This sounds a lot like being a little bit pregnant.

[The Finman]

I don't mind at all, as a matter of fact I appreciate any help that I can get.

I help run former President Reagan's web site, as well as other conservative sites, and I can always use all the help that I can get. :)

[freestyle]

[Savage Beast]

What about using a fradulent government record to influence a U.S. presidential election?