According to the official report, the individual had retained and in some cases shared classified documents after leaving public office. Some of these materials were reportedly used as references while collaborating on a written memoir.

The findings noted that although the individual did possess sensitive information, there was no clear evidence of intentional misconduct or efforts to conceal the documents. Investigators cited a lack of intent, full cooperation during the inquiry, and the absence of obstruction as factors in the decision not to file charges.

In the course of the investigation, certain recordings of interviews related to the materials were deleted by a collaborator but were later recovered. These recordings did not alter the outcome of the inquiry.

The report also included comments on the individual’s memory and cognitive condition, suggesting this might have influenced how a jury would perceive the situation if the case had gone to trial. Legal representatives for the individual criticized these remarks, describing them as unnecessary and unrelated to the legal conclusions.

Documents were found in personal storage areas, including near common household items, leading investigators to suggest that misplacement—rather than concealment—was likely.

Ultimately, the report emphasizes that while mishandling occurred, the behavior did not meet the legal threshold for prosecution, and the individual’s cooperation was a key consideration.