AA meetings and confidentiality

[acmb05]

What is the name of your state?Tennessee

Ok seniors I need an answer to this one. I have been asked to come down to the prosecutors office to answer some question and I need to know if I have to do it or should I wait to get supeoned to talk to them. That is if they do supeona me. I'm not quite sure how this works.

I already know what they want and that is to ask me some questions about a person in my AA group. He said some things and basically told us that he commited a crime. Well evidently someone at the meeting informed the police and he has been arrested.

I need to know if I have to answer thier questions. I know I have heard of cases in the last few years of AA meetings and the confidentiality issue but I never paid to much attention to them.

I'm kind of torn in what to do. These meetings and the confidents that we entrust in others at the meetings I take very seriously. But on the other hand if the guy commited a crime he should pay for that crime and face the punishment.

 

[snostar]

I wouldn't talk to them unless it was a crime against children or I was supeonaed, and in that case my attorney would be right by my side.

 

[acmb05]

If it was a crime against a child

I would not even hesitate. From what I know It would be breaking and entering. Of course I dont know the exact charges against him yet. So I should tell them I dont want to talk to them? Which I really dont unless I absolutely have to.

 

[snostar]

I'd tell them that you are unable to comment at this time on anything that has been disclosed in the confidentially of a AA room.

 

[CdwJava]

While you can choose not to talk to them, there is no legal confidentiality that exists in an AA setting. However, depending on the laws in your state I suppose they MIGHT be able to charge you with a crime for witholding that information.

- Carl

 

[outonbail]

So some guy stands up in an AA meeting and confesses to the crime of breaking and entering......

I thought you people let the lushes sober up before they stand up and talk?

That has to be one for the list of most stupid criminals,,,, I say go ahead and tell the cops what you know, if he's that stupid he belongs in jail!

 

[Jack_David]

If you really feel strongly about it you can always do what politicans do.

Just tell them that you have no recollection of the event in question.

Assuming they would try to charge you with anything because you are with holding information (which I doubt they would), to convict you of anything they would have to prove you were deliberately witholding information, and frankly unless you go around telling people that you are then they cant.

 

[acmb05]

well evidently

So some guy stands up in an AA meeting and confesses to the crime of breaking and entering......

I thought you people let the lushes sober up before they stand up and talk?

That has to be one for the list of most stupid criminals,,,, I say go ahead and tell the cops what you know, if he's that stupid he belongs in jail!

You know nothing about what we do or try to do. It is part of the program. People talk about things in these meetigs that they would never discuss with anyone else including thier spouses. Its part of working the steps. It is also understood that what is said in a meeting stays in a meeting.

 

[acmb05]

Thank you

While you can choose not to talk to them, there is no legal confidentiality that exists in an AA setting. However, depending on the laws in your state I suppose they MIGHT be able to charge you with a crime for witholding that information.

- Carl

This is what I was wanting to know. I have heard of court cases on the matter but was not sure what the rulings were on them. From what i have heard they have plenty of witnesses and since they now know who did it they also have matched up evidence on him. I dont see why they need any of us to testify or give a statement as this will seriously hurt our group if it gets out that people cant talk freely in our meetings without worrying about getting turned in for something.

 

[Kane]

I don't know - and I don't think anyone can claim to know - all the laws in all the states. But, as a general matter there's a difference between not talking, or not cooperating, and actively impeding or hindering an investigation. In the second case you're giving false information or misleading investigators.

Unless you're under oath, I don't believe there's any law that criminalizes failing to cooperate, or refusing to talk. If you're subpoenaed, or otherwise put under oath, then you can be compelled to answer questions, but not otherwise. (This is where the politicians' "I don't recall," comes in.)

If you're really worried, talk to a lawyer in your state. But I believe he will tell you you can't be compelled to answer questions, unless you're under oath.

 

[justalayman]

I don't know - and I don't think anyone can claim to know - all the laws in all the states. But, as a general matter there's a difference between not talking, or not cooperating, and actively impeding or hindering an investigation. In the second case you're giving false information or misleading investigators.

Unless you're under oath, I don't believe there's any law that criminalizes failing to cooperate, or refusing to talk. If you're subpoenaed, or otherwise put under oath, then you can be compelled to answer questions, but not otherwise. (This is where the politicians' "I don't recall," comes in.)

If you're really worried, talk to a lawyer in your state. But I believe he will tell you you can't be compelled to answer questions, unless you're under oath.

How about obstruction of justice?

to the OP: have you discussed this with the AA leader? (I don't know how the group is structured) They may be able to direct you to where you can get specific info on this situation.

 

[outonbail]

It is also understood that what is said in a meeting stays in a meeting.

I find this statement laughable. If this was indeed the case, you wouldn't have the police or prosecutor asking you to come in for questioning now would you.

The guy was a fool for running his mouth, he is also a criminal, by his own admission. Someone innocent was harmed by this guys actions, if not physically then financially. He can use alcohol or drugs as his excuse for such behavior, but that does not equate to him not having to answer to charges for having done the crime.
So, if he's foolish enough to stand up in the AA meeting and announce his criminal activities, under the illusion that he's in the cone of silence or something, then he's not only a criminal and a thief, but an idiot as well. I think this is what needs to be understood.

 

[justalayman]

I find this statement laughable. If this was indeed the case, you wouldn't have the police or prosecutor asking you to come in for questioning now would you.

The guy was a fool for running his mouth, he is also a criminal, by his own admission. Someone innocent was harmed by this guys actions, if not physically then financially. He can use alcohol or drugs as his excuse for such behavior, but that does not equate to him not having to answer to charges for having done the crime.
So, if he's foolish enough to stand up in the AA meeting and announce his criminal activities, under the illusion that he's in the cone of silence or something, then he's not only a criminal and a thief, but an idiot as well. I think this is what needs to be understood.

I believe everyone at least somewhat agrees with you. The dilemma is that the OP is put in a postion of a moral/ethical situation and was looking for a
way to maintain his/her "promise". It seems that this is not a probability but I peersonally commend the OP for attempting to uphold their commitment. I have known people who were helped by AA and would not like to see the system irrepairably damaged.

 

[acmb05]

I was talking

I find this statement laughable. If this was indeed the case, you wouldn't have the police or prosecutor asking you to come in for questioning now would you.

The guy was a fool for running his mouth, he is also a criminal, by his own admission. Someone innocent was harmed by this guys actions, if not physically then financially. He can use alcohol or drugs as his excuse for such behavior, but that does not equate to him not having to answer to charges for having done the crime.
So, if he's foolish enough to stand up in the AA meeting and announce his criminal activities, under the illusion that he's in the cone of silence or something, then he's not only a criminal and a thief, but an idiot as well. I think this is what needs to be understood.

about between members not when it involves the police. I dont know how everyone else feels but what I discuss with someone in a meeting stays in that meeting I dont discuss it with anyone else.

 

[CdwJava]

You know nothing about what we do or try to do. It is part of the program. People talk about things in these meetigs that they would never discuss with anyone else including thier spouses. Its part of working the steps. It is also understood that what is said in a meeting stays in a meeting.

Maybe so, but they have no legal standing to withhold information as might otherwise be required to be disclosed under the law. I believe there are some states that grant some protection to such groups, but as they are informal and not guided by a medical practitioner AND are open to virtually anoyone, it is generally accepted that communications in that setting are not subject to confidentiality.

This coming from a friend of Bill W's.

- Carl