Am I required to report known crimial?

[needadvice5678]

State: CA

Somebody, definitely known by accident, recently emailed and called me a lot, asking me to sell something to another country. They are stolen items, he told me. The total value reaches $300K in 2 months and i think it will reach a million soon. I called police office today in after hour, they wanted me to call back again tomorrow morning. They said "I have the duty".

My question:
Should I report it to police? Is that required by law? Will I be in trouble if I don't do that?
If i decided not to report, should I say "somebody was kidding me, or i mis-understood it"
but cannot say "yes, i know it's crime, but i just don't want to report it to avoid any possible revenge"?

My concern:
Revenge.
I think the guy is a hub, and there are a group of ppl behind him. And he knows my cell phone number.

Any help is appreciated!

 

[CdwJava]

It depends on the law in your unknown state, and the specific allegations. Now that you hyave cast that die, failure to follow through might result in your being charged as an accessory in some manner if you were to fail to say something.

But, it really depends on your state's laws. And, if this involves transporting money or goods overseas, it could become federal.

Do you feel lucky?

- Carl

 

[needadvice5678]

Hi CDWjava, Thanks for your comments.

I am in CA, and they wanted me to help sell em to oversea, tho I have no idea where those items finally go.

So I guess I have to call police again and tell them everything ....

It depends on the law in your unknown state, and the specific allegations. Now that you hyave cast that die, failure to follow through might result in your being charged as an accessory in some manner if you were to fail to say something.

But, it really depends on your state's laws. And, if this involves transporting money or goods overseas, it could become federal.

Do you feel lucky?

- Carl

 

[tranquility]

If the facts are only as you described (no past agreements, no current involvement etc.), you do not have a legal duty to report the information to the police. Moral duty, yes, but not a legal one.

Not talking may be a legal option. Not telling the police the truth if you did talk (misunderstanding/kidding) would not be a legal one. Not ony would you be filing a false police report or obstructing an officer, but also you could buy some of the original crime(s) as an accessory of some sort (before or after the fact). Talking to the police but telling them you have a fear is not going to make them sympathetic to you. That will buy you a hassle (from the police) for sure.

Options:
1. Tell the police (legal, moral, police like, crook hate)
2. Don't talk (legal, not moral, police ambivilent, crook like)
3. Tell story about not knowing (illegal, immoral, police hate, crook like)
4. Tell police you know, but don't tell them (legal, morally ambivilent, police hate, crook like)

 

[CdwJava]

There may not be a legal requirement to tell the police, but now that he has mentioned it to the police, he will likely be suspect #1 if they look into the matter. Under the right circumstances he could be seen as an accessory. And if he aided them in commiting a criminal act in any way (providing names of parties to help, money, assistance in transport, etc.) then he is no longer an accessory - he is a principal to the act.

Certainly he doesn't have to say anything. But unless he is certain that he can in no way be tied to a criminal enterprise, his path would seem clear.

Though he might consider consulting an attorney first.

- Carl

 

[tranquility]

The die is already cast as to criminal liability for any actions taken in assistance to the criminal. Except, perhaps, for conspiracy, the OP's legal status is unchanged by talking to the police now. Talking may make the police/DA less likely to arrest/prosecute. But unless there is a written agreement to that effect, the OP is simply relying on the word of the police and his good looks to prevent legal problems related to this.

By talking to the police at all, he is already suspect #1. If he fails to talk more, suspect #1 in what?

As I wrote in my first post, all this is based on his comments and not on if the true facts would indicate he had taken a prior action to conceal/further the crime. CdwJava's comments just point out how rarely it is in a person's best interests to talk to the police about criminal matters (where one is not the victim) without an attorney present or consulted. Apparently, even being a witness can get you into trouble.

 

[fairisfair]

I am just wondering, How in the heck did this person get your cell phone number???

Hmmmmmm????

 

[CdwJava]

Without knowing what the crime is, or what the OP's involvement is in the matter, it's impossible to say how exposed he is to liability. But, since he said he had been approached to aid in the criminal enterprise, if/when it ever comes to light without his diming it off, his name may very well come up in the investigation and he might find himself under investigation as a suspect instead of a witness.

We also don't know how much he told the cops on that first call. if all he said was, "I know of a crime to be commited", and they told him to call back tomorrow, then he might be okay ... though he might still end up on the suspect list if the suspects are identified later on.

One does not accidentally come across people doing million dollar illegal deals by chance. People don't just ask you for help transporting their illegal goods without having some reason to believe you are going to say yes.

So, there is either much more to this story, these are the dumbest croooks on the planet, or the OP is getting cold feet in participating with them and is trying to find a way out.

- Carl

 

[fairisfair]

Without knowing what the crime is, or what the OP's involvement is in the matter, it's impossible to say how exposed he is to liability. But, since he said he had been approached to aid in the criminal enterprise, if/when it ever comes to light without his diming it off, his name may very well come up in the investigation and he might find himself under investigation as a suspect instead of a witness.

We also don't know how much he told the cops on that first call. if all he said was, "I know of a crime to be commited", and they told him to call back tomorrow, then he might be okay ... though he might still end up on the suspect list if the suspects are identified later on.

One does not accidentally come across people doing million dollar illegal deals by chance. People don't just ask you for help transporting their illegal goods without having some reason to believe you are going to say yes.

So, there is either much more to this story, these are the dumbest croooks on the planet, or the OP is getting cold feet in participating with them and is trying to find a way out.

- Carl

ya think???

 

[needadvice5678]

Hi Tranquility, your reply is so helpful. They once tried to contact me tho anything they can. Like call in at 2am or 6am. And I just avoided to pick up the calls. I will make my decision later, on my own

Thanks

If the facts are only as you described (no past agreements, no current involvement etc.), you do not have a legal duty to report the information to the police. Moral duty, yes, but not a legal one.

Not talking may be a legal option. Not telling the police the truth if you did talk (misunderstanding/kidding) would not be a legal one. Not ony would you be filing a false police report or obstructing an officer, but also you could buy some of the original crime(s) as an accessory of some sort (before or after the fact). Talking to the police but telling them you have a fear is not going to make them sympathetic to you. That will buy you a hassle (from the police) for sure.

Options:
1. Tell the police (legal, moral, police like, crook hate)
2. Don't talk (legal, not moral, police ambivilent, crook like)
3. Tell story about not knowing (illegal, immoral, police hate, crook like)
4. Tell police you know, but don't tell them (legal, morally ambivilent, police hate, crook like)

 

[needadvice5678]

I visited the guy the first time he called. And he told me that was stolen stuff at his place. Then I avoided to pick up any phone calls from his number anymore. I guess records of cellphone bills can show he might call a hundred times during the period while i only took 3 of them.

But I have told the police everything last evening, including from how we started to know to what he sent me yesterday. So it was not simply a "I know something is on going".

I knew him because i was looking for a new department, and he was on my list (from craigslist). I stopped by the place, didn't rent, but he got my occupations and contacts (emails & cell). Then the story starts....

I think it's better for me to call back.

Without knowing what the crime is, or what the OP's involvement is in the matter, it's impossible to say how exposed he is to liability. But, since he said he had been approached to aid in the criminal enterprise, if/when it ever comes to light without his diming it off, his name may very well come up in the investigation and he might find himself under investigation as a suspect instead of a witness.

We also don't know how much he told the cops on that first call. if all he said was, "I know of a crime to be commited", and they told him to call back tomorrow, then he might be okay ... though he might still end up on the suspect list if the suspects are identified later on.

One does not accidentally come across people doing million dollar illegal deals by chance. People don't just ask you for help transporting their illegal goods without having some reason to believe you are going to say yes.

So, there is either much more to this story, these are the dumbest croooks on the planet, or the OP is getting cold feet in participating with them and is trying to find a way out.

- Carl

 

[CdwJava]

ya think???

And, ya know ... another peeve ...

People blame the police for crime, yet people who KNOW about a crime are constantly told that they do not HAVE to report a crime. While often legally true, and very restful for the police as it gives us less work to do, it does nothing to help the victims of a crime. No one quite realizes the effects a witness can have on the successful conclusion of their case until they are themselves a victim. Many victims of burglary and theft are but one witness away from having their crime solved, but the witness chooses to either "not get involved", or they lie. So, the crime goes unsolved.

In more serious crimes (at least in CA) withholding some information can be criminal, but for the more common property crimes people often shrug and mumble something about not wanting to get involved. Thank God there are a few people that have the stones to stand up and say, "That is wrong" and to do the right thing.

Next time, the silent one can be the victim ...

- Carl

 

[CdwJava]

I think it's better for me to call back.

Good!

I commend you, and I hope you follow through on that decision!

- Carl

 

[needadvice5678]

Thanks for those words. I will call after lunch.
In fact, I guess I may have made my decision the first time I called. I just need a push ...

And, ya know ... another peeve ...

People blame the police for crime, yet people who KNOW about a crime are constantly told that they do not HAVE to report a crime. While often legally true, and very restful for the police as it gives us less work to do, it does nothing to help the victims of a crime. No one quite realizes the effects a witness can have on the successful conclusion of their case until they are themselves a victim. Many victims of burglary and theft are but one witness away from having their crime solved, but the witness chooses to either "not get involved", or they lie. So, the crime goes unsolved.

In more serious crimes (at least in CA) withholding some information can be criminal, but for the more common property crimes people often shrug and mumble something about not wanting to get involved. Thank God there are a few people that have the stones to stand up and say, "That is wrong" and to do the right thing.

Next time, the silent one can be the victim ...

- Carl

 

[tranquility]

Law enforcement is a funny thing. When a community, however defined, lose confidence in the police they tend to not witness to the police as much. How was that confidence lost?

Part will be lost from the basic calculation everyone must make in the interactions of life. Should I choose: me, my family, my friends or society?

Let's say I take my wife and go to a friend's house to watch a movie. We eat, pop some popcorn and sit down. I notice my friend brings out a DVD without a box. "Where did you get that?" I ask.

"My friend got the movie and loved it so I copied it" my friend replies.

What should I do?

1. Watch the movie.
2. Leave, telling my friend this is illegal.
3. Go to the FBI and report my friend for the *FELONY* punishable by years in prison and hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.

People live in the community and the police merely visit it. As Carl has told us time and time again, the police don't have any duty to act on information given them. They don't have the duty to protect the witness. And, they don't have a duty to keep a witness' identity secret. Would a reasonable person trade his friends, neighbors, enemies who know where he lives and other aquaintances to society if he has no guarantees of safety or efficacy? No. It's not logical. A person has to be a bit of a hero. Someone who trades his best interests for the interests of others.

In other words, the hero must base everything on the word of those (the police) who may or may not have a good reputation in the community. How that reputation came to be may be fair or unfair, but what it is still matters.