On the recordJuly 14, 1998
I, too, could potentially support the amendment, but high probability, there is no legal texture to that. I do not believe that there is any case law that has been determined anywhere that I know of where high probability was the legal basis of anything. Before I got here I was a prosecutor in Massachusetts. We had 13,000 cases a year. I think willfulness may be the legal term that we want, but I just do not know that there is any court that has ever defined from the legal perspective the term high probability. I do not know what high probability is. High probability. If we get a contribution from someone whose last name is, I do not know, Chin, and there are a lot of Chinese people named Chin; is that high probability? If the court cannot define what a high probability is, then I think we ought to use a term that has a legal texture, a term that is in Black's Law Dictionary, a term that courts somewhere somehow have used to determine legislative intent.
Source
govinfo.gov




