Guest Post - DC Macdonald: Has anything like this happened before?

In the comments to a previous post, D. C. Macdonald said:

Buckets:

I can well understand where you are coming from. When this all started last May 18, I was unwilling to trust anything until I knew that all the recordings were out there for context's sake, and that they were not altered in any way. Until that point I was unwilling to take the argument regarding the recording contents by the CPC and other opposition parties at face value. Then I heard the first releases, and I thought some of it sounded off just with my ear. I don't have access to sound equipment nor is my computer set up to do such work, so I had to wait.

Then over the last five days I have seen more than enough to convince me these tapes were altered, at least the copies the CPC released to the public, and done so with intent. What intent exactly I don't know, though the most likely intent is to minimize the Grewal looking like he was selling his vote, and to maximize the idea the Liberals were trying to buy his vote. I do know that I cannot accept the answers the CPC has provided to explain all this, the idea this was all due to accident and coincidence is really hard to swallow at this point, given everything that has come out.

Bottom line for me, is even if the originals were not altered, it is clear the copies were, and now it looks like it was the CPC doing the editing as opposed to Grewal, which was my first suspicion. At this point it does not matter if it is the originals or copies that the CPC altered, the fact is they altered these tapes and by doing so bore false witness. I have seen many Conservatives argue that the cops do this kind of editing all the time without it being a problem, however the cops also have to provide the full transcript as well as proof of the integrity of the chain of evidence from the moment of recording to the moment it is used in court. That this fact appears lost on the Conservatives tells me just how little they understand the logic they are using to defend these tapes.

Incidentally, can you or anyone else think of a similar case in Canadian political history where a party leader has used altered evidence against his political opposition? I've been racking my brains on this one and I can't think of anything comparable to this incident. Anyone else?