Let’s play Sherlock concerning copies vs drafts vs originals.

Why multiple copies? If they were copies of the same thing, he would have only needed to see one of the copies. The fact that he saw multiple copies of the same report would indicate that they were copies made for review by multiple parties. Most likely with individual responses on each copy. Most likely explanation is a box of the review drafts of the final report with various parties comments. That explains multiple copies of the same document, allows you to call them copies, and explains why he needed to take multiple copies (they were different).

Originals vs photocopies? A photocopy of an annotated document is obvious. If they were photocopies of annotated documents, there is less reason to take them. You can’t hide anything. If you are setting a trap for him (like the staff did on Oct 2), you use the juiciest bait. Something that looks like the one and only copy. Most likely scenario is that he though he had the originals. Also, SCI is not photocopied willy nilly. More copies mean more risk of losing one copy. I have worked with SCI – you have to justify why you need a copy and cannot just borrow an existing copy.

Do photocopies of the lost documents exist? We won’t know until the grand jury hears the case. There is an investigation going on now and both the investigators and the defense are holding their cards tight. Berger is holding to the “I’m clumsy” line. His defense wants to know what the other side knows and wants to precondition the jury pool. The investigators are letting just enough out to spoil the “I’m clumsy” defense. Since he obviously hasn’t come clean in the last couple of months, the investigation needs some ground truth to judge his statements. He will only admit to what he knows the investigation knows. If they do exist, they investigation could use them to establish motive. As I understand it, there is no evidence sharing before a grand jury is called. That’s when the prosecution lays its evidence on the table.