Am I missing something here or do you think that’s really what they thought? Like maybe they figured if they got caught they still wanted to be protected from any civil suits? Not that I can think of anything that would be grounds for a lawsuit holding them personally responsible financially. Idk I just find it so hard to believe that these jackasses were not only that stupid but didn’t seek any legal council either.
I wouldn’t think so but it appears that’s the case? I’m really pretty confused about the whole thing. In fact I don’t really understand why they’d actually be liable for a civil suit at all for actions performed within the scope of their government job. Maybe if a crime is committed that goes out the window and they are liable?
Insurance would also not cover the legal fees for criminal and illegal activities.
Am I missing something here or do you think that’s really what they thought? Like maybe they figured if they got caught they still wanted to be protected from any civil suits? Not that I can think of anything that would be grounds for a lawsuit holding them personally responsible financially. Idk I just find it so hard to believe that these jackasses were not only that stupid but didn’t seek any legal council either.
So they can be insured against personal civil suits by engaging in illegal activity outside their normal government duties?!
I wouldn’t think so but it appears that’s the case? I’m really pretty confused about the whole thing. In fact I don’t really understand why they’d actually be liable for a civil suit at all for actions performed within the scope of their government job. Maybe if a crime is committed that goes out the window and they are liable?