“Justice delayed is justice denied.” The saying is so popular, there are disputes as to its origin.
Representative David Schweikert turned the practice of delay into a tool to avoid responsibility. In 2017 the House Committee on Ethics began an investigation into Schweikert’s campaign activities. He initially refused to cooperate with the investigation.
One of the issues was whether Schweikert pressured government paid employees to perform campaign activities to aid his reelection. Such conduct is illegal. Investigators believed Schweikert’s emails with staff members might contain relevant information. Schweikert delayed responding, and then failed to produce the emails with his staff.
After more time and spending more taxpayer funds, the investigators discovered other sources for the emails. The emails revealed a trove of incriminating evidence against Schweikert. But the delay was costly. Not to Schweikert, but to the investigation and the system of justice.
Through his obstruction, Schweikert avoided even more charges of campaign violations. The statute of limitation had run on those charges. He won. Justice delayed was justice denied.
All of this is set out in graphic detail in the House Ethics Subcommittee report:
*Schweikert was aware of the danger of an email trail. He told staff, “we don’t want any paper trails of emails floating around about” the staff engaging in campaign work. (Page 67)
*“The [Investigative Subcommittee] received numerous email exchanges that Representative Schweikert was copied on or that he sent in which official staff were engaging in campaign work, but which were not included in [Schweikert’s] document productions to the [Subcommittee].” (Page 67)
*Schweikert’s delays and failure to produce clearly relevant (and incriminating) evidence went “beyond what is reasonable.” (Page 95)
