November 10, 2014 — The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 makes a criminal out of anyone who “destroys … any record, document, or tangible object [emphasis added] with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation.” If the Supreme Court were to clarify the “tangible object” part of the law for John Yates, that could have an impact on the Marathon cases.
When is a fish more than just a fish?
That’s the question the Supreme Court is angling to answer. And its pending decision is already having ripple effects on two Boston Marathon bombing related cases: On Thursday, sentencing was delayed for two men convicted of impeding the investigation.
What’s this Yates case about?
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of John Yates, a Florida commercial fisherman. In 2007, state officials boarded Yates’ boat at sea and found he had caught 72 red groupers that were smaller than the federal legal minimum. They gave Yates a citation and told him to return to land with the fish.
But when he returned, officials found only 69 undersized grouper; three had been thrown overboard under Yates’s orders, a crewman admitted.
Read the full story from The Boston Globe