Special Counsel Jack Smith has filed a comprehensive rebuttal to former President Donald Trump’s claims that his Espionage Act prosecution should be dismissed due to alleged mishandling of classified documents by federal investigators.
The 33-page response counters Trump’s argument that the documents were not preserved in their original order during the Mar-a-Lago search.
Smith’s response highlights Trump’s inconsistent defense strategies and refutes the notion that the order of documents within the boxes is crucial.
He states that the primary issue is the unlawful retention of “some of the nation’s most highly guarded secrets” in a careless manner, mixed with personal items like newspapers, thank you notes, and photographs.
Trump’s defense argued that the disruption of the document order during the August 2022 search compromised his ability to claim ignorance and lack of intent.
They asserted that federal agents acted in “bad faith” by not maintaining the original arrangement of the documents, which allegedly destroyed exculpatory evidence.
Smith dismissed these claims as “meritless,” pointing out that there has never been a case where the specific order of documents during a search was grounds for a spoliation claim.
He clarified that the integrity of the box-to-box contents has been preserved, allowing Trump to make any arguments about document placement.
Smith criticized Trump’s shifting defenses, noting that he previously claimed to have declassified the documents, accused the feds of framing him, and designated the documents as personal records.
Smith questioned why Trump’s legal team had not raised concerns about document order until recently.
The special counsel also referenced witness accounts suggesting Trump’s direct involvement in packing the boxes, indicating a detailed knowledge of their contents.
Some staff even referred to the boxes as “Beautiful Mind” boxes, likening Trump’s recall to the genius mathematician John Nash.
Smith argued that the disorganized storage of the documents undermines Trump’s spoliation claims.
The prosecution contended that the feds could not have anticipated any exculpatory value in the chaotic arrangement of the materials.
Defending the Mar-a-Lago search as lawful and conducted in good faith, Smith asserted that there is no evidence of bad faith or destruction of exculpatory evidence by federal agents.
The rebuttal underscores the ongoing legal battle over Trump’s handling of classified documents and the prosecution’s efforts to hold him accountable for the alleged mishandling of sensitive information.
