What legal obligation?

[turtlemania]

What is the name of your state? MN

John Doe tells Jane Smith that he committed a crime. What is Jane's legal obligation to report that crime?? and does the legal obligation depend on the seriousness of the crime??

 

[JETX]

Unless the information was a 'privileged communication' (see below), she is obligated to disclose the knowledge to the authorities.

privileged communication
n. statements and conversations made under circumstances of assured confidentiality which must not be disclosed in court. These include communications between husband and wife, attorney and client, physician or therapist and patient, and minister or priest with anyone seeing them in their religious status. In some states the privilege is extended to reporters and informants. Thus, such people cannot be forced to testify or reveal the conversations to law enforcement or courts, even under threat of contempt of court, and if one should break the confidentiality he/she can be sued by the person who had confidence in him/her. The reason for the privilege is to allow people to speak with candor to spouse or professional counsellor, even though it may hinder a criminal prosecution. The extreme case is when a priest hears an admission of murder or other serious crime in the confessional and can do nothing about it. The privilege may be lost if the one who made the admission waives the privilege, or, in the case of an attorney, if the client sues the attorney claiming negligence in conduct of the case.

 

[calatty]

Not true. Citizens have no legal obligation to report a crime, and there is no law punishing people who don't.

 

[JETX]

Not true. Citizens have no legal obligation to report a crime, and there is no law punishing people who don't.

I guess that "calatty" has never heard of:

misprision of a felony
n. the crime of concealing another's felony (serious crime) from law enforcement officers.

obstruction of justice
n. an attempt to interfere with the administration of the courts, the judicial system or law enforcement officers, including threatening witnesses, improper conversations with jurors, hiding evidence or interfering with an arrest. Such activity is a crime.

accessory
n. a second-string player who helps in the commission of a crime by driving the getaway car, providing the weapons, assisting in the planning, providing an alibi, or hiding the principal offender after the crime. Usually the accessory is not immediately present during the crime, but must be aware that the crime is going to be committed or has been committed. Usually an accessory's punishment is less than that of the main perpetrator, but a tough jury or judge may find the accessory just as responsible.

And the fact that if a party is aware of a persons illegal act and doesn't report it, and someone is later injured or killed as a result of that failure, that party could also face civil and/or criminal charges of omission and/or negligence (failure to act).

 

[racer72]

A couple of recently passed laws in my state specifically state that it is a crime to not report certain crimes to law enforcement.

 

[calatty]

I am familiar with those terms, but unlike you, I know they don't apply. To be an accessory, you have to do some affirmative act, or, using your definition, "help in the commission." Mere knowledge of a crime and failure to prevent it or report it is not enough. Lots of cases on that. Obstruction likewise requires an act, or "activity" in your definition. I am not aware of any misprision statute still in existence. How about some case law or statutes instead of legal dictionary definitions of terms that don't apply?

 

[JETX]

Modesto, California:
"SACRAMENTO--United States Attorney Paul L. Seave announced that C. WILLIAM GORDIN, 49, of Modesto, was sentenced today by U.S. District Court Judge David F. Levi in Sacramento to four months in prison, to be followed by a year of supervised release including 2 months in a halfway house, in connection with a massive investment fraud scheme. GORDIN was also ordered to pay $100,000 to the Trustee appointed by the Court, and a $6,000 fine. GORDIN also faces the mandatory revocation by the California Board of Accountancy of his license to practice as a certified public accountant.

GORDIN pleaded guilty on October 5, 2000, to one count of misprision of a felony, which charged him with taking affirmative steps to conceal the sale of unregistered securities by IFR Trust, an entity controlled by his client, LARRY WILCOXSON, 48, also of Modesto. According to his plea agreement, GORDIN performed book keeping work for IFR Trust, and maintained the bank accounts through which a massive fraud scheme was perpetrated. GORDIN was ordered to surrender to serve his sentence on May 2, 2001. He will be required by federal law to serve the full four months in prison."
Source: http://www.robbevans.com/html/wilcoxdoj02.html

And in Texas:
"WACO, Texas (UPI) – A former federal prosecutor said he would plead guilty Tuesday to a federal charge that he withheld information from superiors in the investigation of the 1993 Branch Davidian standoff near Waco.

Bill Johnston said he agreed to a plea agreement that called for him to plead guilty to misprision of a felony, the Waco Tribune-Herald reported Tuesday. Misprision of a felony means the accused knew of a felony committed by another and failed to report it."
Source: https://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/2/6/155242.shtml

And another in Texas (convicted, but reversed on appeal):
http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/91/91-08383-0.htm

And lets not forget 15 USC 4:
"Sec. 4. - Misprision of felony
Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both"

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

What is the name of your state? MN

John Doe tells Jane Smith that he committed a crime. What is Jane's legal obligation to report that crime?? and does the legal obligation depend on the seriousness of the crime??

My response:

Well, it also depends upon who Jane is, and what her profession is - - for example, the California Penal Code requires hospitals, pharmacists, and doctors to report any injuries inflicted by violence. If a patient suffers from a gunshot wound, the doctor treating him or her must inform the police. A doctor treating a minor who appears to be a victim of child abuse must report the condition to the appropriate authorities.

A doctor who believes that John Doe is a present, immediate and clear threat of harm to someone, the doctor (Jane Smith) must immediately inform the proper authorities of such threat. For example, John Doe is seeing his psychotherapist, Jane. John confides to Jane that "as soon as this session is complete, I'm going home to get rid of all my problems - - by killing my wife!"

IAAL

 

[HomeGuru]

Thank you.

 

[calatty]

My point is, again, that a mere failure to report is not a enough, but some kind of affirmative act is required to make it a crime. For example, for a prosecution under 18 USCA 4, misprision: “Affirmative step to conceal is required element of misprision of felony; mere failure to make known does not suffice.” (U.S. v. Warters (5th Cir. 1989) 885 F.2d 1266). “An essential element of the offense of misprision of felony is concealment, and mere failure to report a felony is not sufficient to constitute a violation under this section.” (U.S. v. Johnson (5th Cir. 1977) 546 F.2d 1225.) See also Lancey v. U. S. (9th Cir. 1966) 356 F.2d 407 [“positive act” required]; In re Morris (Ariz. 1990) 793 P.2d 544 ["The elements of the crime of misprision of felony have been stated to be: (1) a felony was committed, (2) defendant had knowledge of the felony, (3) defendant failed to notify authorities and (4) defendant took an affirmative step to conceal the crime.... Mere passive failure to report a felony has been held insufficient to sustain a conviction.").

Same thing with being an accessory, e.g. “Mere knowledge of a crime and a failure to report the same do not alone constitute being an accessory.” (People v. Broom (Colo.App. 1990) 797 P.2d 754.) “Just as a defendant's mere presence does not establish his intent to participate or assist in the crime, neither do any of the other factors, such as failure to assist, flight, or failure to report the crime. There must be something more, some affirmative act by the defendant by which he evidences an intent to facilitate the crime.” (Brumley v. DeTella (7th Cir. 1996) 86 F.3d 856.)

Even your newspaper articles (again, no case law), which are notorious for getting the law wrong, speak of “taking affirmative steps.” Turtlemania’s question involves a mere failure to report, not taking any kind of affirmative steps to conceal. So the answer is, NO, if Jane merely knows that John committed a crime and does not report it, she has not committed any crime (unless, as IAAL points out, Jane is a member of a class of professionals required to report). If Jane helps John conceal the crime, then she has committed a crime herself.

 

[JETX]

Calatty: you are far-afield from the original question.....
As a reminder, that was:
"John Doe tells Jane Smith that he committed a crime. What is Jane's legal obligation to report that crime??"

My correct response was "Unless the information was a 'privileged communication' (see below), she is obligated to disclose the knowledge to the authorities."

Yours was: "Not true. Citizens have no legal obligation to report a crime, and there is no law punishing people who don't."

I think that I have provided sufficient points to show that there COULD be an obligation.

You, however, have provided NOTHING to support your claim that there is NO obligation. So, how about it?? Can you provide ANY support for your claim that there is NO legal obligation, at any time, in any case, for a third party to report a crime??

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

My response:

Calatty, you said - -

"Not true. Citizens have no legal obligation to report a crime, and there is no law punishing people who don't."

and then you said - -

"Mere knowledge of a crime and failure to prevent it or report it is not enough. Lots of cases on that. Obstruction likewise requires an act, or "activity" in your definition. I am not aware of any misprision statute still in existence."

And then, I later gave an example of such, to which you admitted and said - -

"(unless, as IAAL points out, Jane is a member of a class of professionals required to report). If Jane helps John conceal the crime, then she has committed a crime herself.)"

So, what this all boils down to is that you were wrong with your "blanket" statements of the law, and I was correct.

Just admit that you were wrong.

IAAL

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

My response:

Well, CalAtty, I'm still waiting . . .

IAAL

 

[calatty]

Darling IAAL --
I had no idea we were fighting again. If I erred, it was by being incomplete in only stating the general rule - that "citizens" (a term used in the law to describe members of the general public, as distinguished from members of specialized groups) do not have an obligation to report crimes - without mentioning the exception for certain professionals, which you so kindly brought up. But why chastise me and not JETX whose general rule - that mere failure to report a crime constitutes the crimes of being an accessory, misprision, etc. - is utterly wrong, whose exception for people with "privilege" doesn't exist, and whose sources are newspaper articles and legal dictionaries which don't even support his/her point? Surely a man of your great intellect and high standards like you, IAAL, can distinguish general rules from exceptions, and BS from legal support.

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

Darling IAAL --
I had no idea we were fighting again. If I erred, it was by being incomplete in only stating the general rule - that "citizens" (a term used in the law to describe members of the general public, as distinguished from members of specialized groups) do not have an obligation to report crimes - without mentioning the exception for certain professionals, which you so kindly brought up. But why chastise me and not JETX whose general rule - that mere failure to report a crime constitutes the crimes of being an accessory, misprision, etc. - is utterly wrong, whose exception for people with "privilege" doesn't exist, and whose sources are newspaper articles and legal dictionaries which don't even support his/her point? Surely a man of your great intellect and high standards like you, IAAL, can distinguish general rules from exceptions, and BS from legal support.

My response:

We're not "fighting again." I'm merely bringing to light an exception to your "blanket rule". And, when did a doctor, etc. become a non-citizen? The fact is, we didn't know who "Jane" was in our writer's scenario, and you merely assumed that Jane wasn't a professional that was required to "report" a crime under the law.

I don't enjoy yanking JetX's chain as much as I enjoy yanking on yours. You seems to take my criticisms too much to heart - - whereas JetX sometimes sees the "error of his ways", admits it, lets it go, and moves on. You, on the other hand, are always looking for a reason or justification for your opinion or stance on a subject, without looking at all the potential possibilities.

I just love conversing with you. You crack me up!

IAAL