Officials: Scant evidence that Clinton had malicious intent in handling of emails

[Akicita]

197. I just explained it to you. I'll add a little more so maybe you can understand.

Negligence can also mean that someone who has a legal responsibility for something does not fulfill that responsibility through carelessness or inattention. So an adult who is responsible for a small child but is not paying attention to the child because they are intoxicated could be charged with negligence if the child ran out in the street and was hit by a car even though the adult had no intent for the child to get hurt or to run out on the street.

Or a government official who has a sworn duty to protect classified information could be charged with negligence if they allowed classified information to be stored in an unsecured place through carelessness or inattention to the rules governing classified info. No intent is required. I believe the standard is gross negligence which just means greatly negligent or very badly negligent so the government official would have to have been extremely careless or inattentive to the rules for handling classified material.

If Hillary had her aides send emails to her private server with classified info transcribed or summarized from the classified system so she didn't have to walk to a different part of the building to the secure room to read the classified documents herself, she is guilty of gross negligence. That is a clear, gross, disregard for the rules of handling classified info. No two ways about it. We don't know if that happened but it is one of the possibilities where she would be guilty of gross negligence without having any intent to illegally disseminate classified materials. She would just have done it for convenience.

Hopefully that will clear it up for you. If not, you might look up the word negligence in the dictionary or let me know and I will try again.