DOCSLIB.ORG

Witnesses Do Not Testify

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

T O EN F J TM U R ST U.S. Department of Justice A I P C E E D B O J C S F A Office of Justice Programs V M F O I N A C I J S R E BJ G O OJJ DP O F PR National Institute of Justice JUSTICE National Institute of Justice Issues and Practices Preventing Gang- and Drug-Related Witness Intimidation About the National Institute of Justice The National Institute of Justice (NIJ), a component of the • The research and development program that resulted in Office of Justice Programs, is the research and development the creation of police body armor that has meant the agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. NIJ was estab- difference between life and death to hundreds of police lished to prevent and reduce crime and to improve the officers. criminal justice system. Specific mandates established by Congress in the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act • Pioneering scientific advances such as the research and of 1968, as amended, and the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 development of DNA analysis to positively identify direct the National Institute of Justice to: suspects and eliminate the innocent from suspicion. • Sponsor special projects, and research and develop- • The evaluation of innovative justice programs to deter- ment programs that will improve and strengthen the mine what works, including drug enforcement, commu- criminal justice system and reduce or prevent crime. nity policing, community anti-drug initiatives, prosecu- tion of complex drug cases, drug testing throughout the • Conduct national demonstration projects that employ criminal justice system, and user accountability pro- innovative or promising approaches for improving crimi- grams. nal justice. • Creation of a corrections information-sharing system • Develop new technologies to fight crime and improve that enables State and local officials to exchange more criminal justice. efficient and cost-effective concepts and techniques for planning, financing, and constructing new prisons and • Evaluate the effectiveness of criminal justice programs jails. and identify programs that promise to be successful if continued or repeated. • Operation of the world’s largest criminal justice infor- mation clearinghouse, a resource used by State and local • Recommend actions that can be taken by Federal, State, officials across the Nation and by criminal justice agen- and local governments as well as by private organiza- cies in foreign countries. tions to improve criminal justice. • Carry out research on criminal behavior. The Institute Director, who is appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, establishes the Institute’s objec- • Develop new methods of crime prevention and reduc- tives, guided by the priorities of the Office of Justice Pro- tion of crime and delinquency. grams, the Department of Justice, and the needs of the criminal justice field. The Institute actively solicits the views The National Institute of Justice has a long history of of criminal justice professionals to identify their most critical accomplishments, including the following: problems. Dedicated to the priorities of Federal, State, and local criminal justice agencies, research and development at • Basic research on career criminals that led to the devel- the National Institute of Justice continues to search for opment of special police and prosecutor units to deal answers to what works and why in the Nation’s war on drugs with repeat offenders. and crime. • Research that confirmed the link between drugs and crime. U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs National Institute of Justice Preventing Gang- and Drug-Related Witness Intimidation by Peter Finn and Kerry Murphy Healey November 1996 Issues and Practices in Criminal Justice is a publication series of the National Institute of Justice. Each report presents the program options and management issues in a topic area, based on a review of research and evaluation findings, operational experience, and expert opinion on the subject. The intent is to provide information to make informed choices in planning, implementing, and improving programs and practice in criminal justice. National Institute of Justice Jeremy Travis Director Samuel C. McQuade Program Monitor Advisory Panel A. Franklin Burgess, Jr. Thomas O. Mills Deputy Presiding Judge Deputy Chief Criminal Division Kansas City, Missouri, Police Department Superior Court of the District of Columbia Police Headquarters 500 Indiana Avenue, NW 1125 Locust Street Room 2500 Kansas City, MO 64106 Washington, DC 20001 John J. Pogash Michael O. Freeman 9954 Mallow Street Hennepin County Attorney Manassas, VA 22100 C200 Hennepin County Government Center Minneapolis, MN 55487 James W. Rice Special Agent Federal Bureau of Investigation Violent Crimes and Gang Unit 1900 Half Street, SW Washington, DC 20535 Prepared for the National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice by Abt Associates Inc., under contract #OJP-94-C-007. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. The National Institute of Justice is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime. NCJ 163067 Table of Contents Page Foreword .......................................................................................................................................................... vii Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................................................ ix Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................................... xi Chapter 1: The Nature and Extent of Witness Intimidation ..................................................................... 1 What Is Witness Intimidation? ...................................................................................................... 1 Types of Intimidation .......................................................................................................... 1 Gang-Inspired Fear: A Particularly Pervasive Problem..................................................... 2 Fear Is Not the Only Reason Witnesses Do Not Testify .................................................... 4 How Serious Is Witness Intimidation?.......................................................................................... 4 Forms of Intimidation ................................................................................................................... 5 Physical Violence ................................................................................................................ 6 Explicit Threats of Physical Violence ................................................................................. 6 Indirect Intimidation ........................................................................................................... 7 Property Damage ................................................................................................................. 7 Courtroom Intimidation ...................................................................................................... 7 Other Forms of Intimidation ............................................................................................... 7 The Primary Actors in Witness Intimidation ................................................................................ 7 Types of Perpetrators .......................................................................................................... 7 The Most Likely Targets of Intimidation............................................................................ 7 When Intimidation Occurs .................................................................................................. 9 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 9 Endnotes ........................................................................................................................................ 9 PART I COMPONENTS OF A COMPREHENSIVE WITNESS SECURITY PROGRAM Chapter 2: Traditional Approaches to Witness Security .......................................................................... 13 Requesting High Bail .................................................................................................................. 13 Vigorous Prosecution of Intimidators ......................................................................................... 14 Charging Practices ............................................................................................................ 14 Advantages and Drawbacks of Prosecution ...................................................................... 14 Witness Management .................................................................................................................. 16 Page Basic Victim/Witness Assistance Program Services .................................................................. 19 Conclusion................................................................................................................................... 20 Endnotes .....................................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Review of the Victoria Police Witness Protection Program

    Review of the Victoria Police Witness Protection Program

    REVIEW OF THE VICTORIA POLICE WITNESS PROTECTION PROGRAM Report of the Director, Police Integrity July 2005 Ordered to be printed Victorian Government Printer Session 2003 - 2005 P.P. No.145 To The Honourable the President of the Legislative Council and The Honourable the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly Events last year and this have drawn to public attention the danger faced by some witnesses who give evidence in criminal trials or who are to do so. Upholding the criminal law and maintaining civil order depend to a very large extent on the preparedness of witnesses to give evidence to the court: if there is no witness, there can generally be no prosecution. The integrity and efficiency of our system of witness protection is important. It is a duty of the justice system to protect witnesses; only rarely may they need protection against the ultimate violence of murder, but any intimidated witness, too frightened to speak out fully and truthfully, undermines the cause of justice. Apathetic witnesses and witnesses who fear the system of justice itself are also of concern. In response to the increased attention on witnesses and acting under new powers to conduct an investigation on my own motion, I initiated a review into the Victoria Police Witness Protection Program under s.86NA of the Police Regulation Act 1958. This Report describes the findings of that review and sets out recommendations for reform. I present it to the Parliament pursuant to s.102J(2) of the Act. The immediate future – given current trends in serious and organized crime – suggests an increase in demand for Witsec services.
  • Witness Protection Program

    Witness Protection Program

    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. ~---------~--~--~~~-~~--~----- WITNESS PROTECTION PROGRAM BY THE HAWAII CRIME COMMISSION State Capitol Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 NOVEMBER 1980 291 -----~------~~ ~~ 1 WITNESS PROTECTION PROGRAM U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the pE'rson or organization onginatlng It. POints of view or opinions stated in thiS document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the officlat position or pOlicies of the Nationat Institute of Justice Permission to reproduce this COPl"igblQQ matenal has been granted by Hawaii Crime Commission --------.. --~. - -----~~~------------ ---------------------------- - ---- to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permis­ sion of the ~w. owner. Hawaii Crime Commission November 1980 1'j George R. Ariyoshi Jean S. King 1 Governor Lt. Governor This report provides a study of witness protection programs, recommendations, and a model statute for consideration by the Legislature. The Crime Commission recommends implementation of the statute to aid in the war on career and organized crime connected persons and activities. A brief Executive Summary will allow interested persons to quickly grasp the study, understand the recommendations and statute. A Table of Contents will allow the reader to find specific 'i, , information without having to read the complete report. .\ THOMAS T. OSHIRO Chairman Hawaii Crime Commission Commission Members RAFAEL ACOBA NEAL OKABAYASHI GENE ALBANO (resigned Oct. 1980) BORICK PEROFF MAGGIE BUNSON (resigned Oct. 1980) NAPUA STEVENS POIRE A. VAN HORN DIAMOND FRANK WHITE, JR. ALWYN KAKUDA Edward J.
  • Civil Rights Violations

    Civil Rights Violations

    Civil Rights Violations Police Misconduct Nicholas S. Kamau, Esq. Police Misconduct Any improper or illegal behavior engaged in by a police officer while attempting to administer justice Types of Police Misconduct Excessive Force – The use of force that exceeds the amount of force that a police officer reasonably believes is necessary. Whether the amount of force was objectively reasonable under the circumstances is a factual issue to be determined by the jury. Types of Police Misconduct Sexual Misconduct- Sexual misconduct includes sexual harassment or sexual assault, indecent assault, an act of indecency, possession of child pornography or other behaviors of a sexual nature which are crimes in Pennsylvania. Sexual misconduct is the second most reported form of police misconduct. Types of Police Misconduct Witness Tampering –This behavior concerns an officer who attempts to either change a witness’ testimony, or prevents a witness from testifying in a criminal or civil proceeding. Types of Police Misconduct False confessions – Some officers convince individuals to give false confessions, convincing them to plead guilty to something they did not actually do. Types of Police Misconduct Racial profiling – Racial profiling is the use of someone’s race or ethnicity as a justification for suspecting him of committing a crime. For instance, assuming a man must be a terrorist because he’s Muslim, or assuming a black man driving an expensive car must have stolen it. Types of Police Misconduct False Arrest - A false arrest is an arrest that is made without a warrant, or without probable cause. A person may sue on the grounds of false arrest if there was not a legitimate reason to arrest him in the first place.
  • Ending Threats and Reprisals Against Victims of Torture and Related International Crimes

    Ending Threats and Reprisals Against Victims of Torture and Related International Crimes

    ENDING THREATS AND REPRISALS AGAINST VICTIMS OF TORTURE AND RELATED INTERNATIONAL CRIMES: A CALL TO ACTION December 2009 87 Vauxhall Walk London, SE11 5HJ United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)20 7793 1777 Fax: +44 (0)20 7793 1719 Web: www.redress.org Registered Charity No.: 1015786 This Report was researched and written by Paulina Vega Gonzalez and Carla Ferstman. © The Redress Trust This Publication is available in English, French, Spanish and Arabic and is available in hard copy and electronic (soft) copy, from REDRESS’ website. For further information on this or other REDRESS publications, please contact REDRESS or visit our website: www.redress.org. We are very grateful to the European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights for funding this research. 2 Introduction | REDRESS ENDING THREATS AND REPRISALS AGAINST VICTIMS OF TORTURE AND RELATED INTERNATIONAL CRIMES: A CALL TO ACTION Contents Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 5 Part I. Identifying the Problem ........................................................................................... 9 I.1 The Crimes........................................................................................................................ 9 I.2 The Individuals and Groups Usually in Need of Protection ........................................... 11 Part II. The Right of Protection......................................................................................... 15 II.1 Protection as a Right in and
  • Pattern Criminal Jury Instructions for the District Courts of the First Circuit)

    Pattern Criminal Jury Instructions for the District Courts of the First Circuit)

    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE 2019 REVISIONS TO PATTERN CRIMINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE DISTRICT COURTS OF THE FIRST CIRCUIT DISTRICT OF MAINE INTERNET SITE EDITION Updated 6/24/19 by Chief District Judge Nancy Torresen PATTERN CRIMINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT Preface to 1998 Edition Citations to Other Pattern Instructions How to Use the Pattern Instructions Part 1—Preliminary Instructions 1.01 Duties of the Jury 1.02 Nature of Indictment; Presumption of Innocence 1.03 Previous Trial 1.04 Preliminary Statement of Elements of Crime 1.05 Evidence; Objections; Rulings; Bench Conferences 1.06 Credibility of Witnesses 1.07 Conduct of the Jury 1.08 Notetaking 1.09 Outline of the Trial Part 2—Instructions Concerning Certain Matters of Evidence 2.01 Stipulations 2.02 Judicial Notice 2.03 Impeachment by Prior Inconsistent Statement 2.04 Impeachment of Witness Testimony by Prior Conviction 2.05 Impeachment of Defendant's Testimony by Prior Conviction 2.06 Evidence of Defendant's Prior Similar Acts 2.07 Weighing the Testimony of an Expert Witness 2.08 Caution as to Cooperating Witness/Accomplice/Paid Informant 2.09 Use of Tapes and Transcripts 2.10 Flight After Accusation/Consciousness of Guilt 2.11 Statements by Defendant 2.12 Missing Witness 2.13 Spoliation 2.14 Witness (Not the Defendant) Who Takes the Fifth Amendment 2.15 Definition of “Knowingly” 2.16 “Willful Blindness” As a Way of Satisfying “Knowingly” 2.17 Definition of “Willfully” 2.18 Taking a View 2.19 Character Evidence 2.20 Testimony by Defendant
  • Working with the Justice Sector to End Violence Against Women and Girls

    Working with the Justice Sector to End Violence Against Women and Girls

    Working with the Justice Sector to End Violence against Women and Girls Developed by: Cheryl Thomas, Director, Women’s Program Laura Young, Staff Attorney, International Justice Program Mary Ellingen, Staff Attorney, Women’s Program Contributors: Margarita Alarcon, Lawyer (Cuba) Dr. Kelly Askin, Senior Legal Officer, International Justice, Open Society Justice Initiative, United States Lisa Dailey, Lawyer (United States) Geraldine R. Bjallerstedt, Lawyer, Head of Nairobi Office, Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law (Kenya) Terence Fitzgerald, Senior Program Specialist, Justice Operations Division, International Justice Mission (United States) Loretta Frederick, Senior Legal and Policy Advisor, Battered Women’s Justice Project, (Minnesota, United States) Albena Koycheva, Lawyer (Bulgaria) Audrey Lee and Ann Campbell, International Women’s Rights Action Watch Asia Pacific (Malaysia) Sara A. Lulo, Executive Director, Avon Global Center for Justice, Adjunct Professor of Law, Cornell Law School (United States) Patricia MacIntosh, Deputy Minister of Community Services (Canada) Aileen Marques, Lawyer (India) Eniko Pap, Lawyer (Hungary) Dr. Maria F. Perez Solla, Lawyer (Austria) Justice Sonia A.C. Rivera, Senior Judge, Gender Violence Specialized Court (Madrid, Spain) Dr. Anicée Van Engeland-Nourai, Lecturer in Law, University of Exeter, Research Associate, SOAS (United Kingdom) Joan Winship, Executive Director, International Association of Women Judges (United States) Justice Sector Module 1 December 2011 INTRODUCTION
  • PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT of APPEALS for the THIRD CIRCUIT ___No. 10-2790 ___UNITED STATES of AMERI

    PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT of APPEALS for the THIRD CIRCUIT ___No. 10-2790 ___UNITED STATES of AMERI

    PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT _____________ No. 10-2790 _____________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. GLORIOUS SHAVERS, a/k/a G, a/k/a G-Bucks, a/k/a Julious Colzie, a/k/a Glorious Grand Glorious Shavers, Appellant _____________ No. 10-2931 _____________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JERMEL LEWIS, a/k/a STAR, a/k/a PR-STAR, a/k/a P Jermel Lewis, Appellant _____________ No. 10-2971 _____________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ANDREW WHITE, Appellant _________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Crim. Nos. 08-01616-001, 08-0161-002, 08-0161-003) District Judge: Honorable J. Curtis Joyner Argued March 19, 2012 _________________ Before: RENDELL, FISHER, and CHAGARES, Circuit Judges. (Filed: August 27, 2012) 2 Keith M. Donoghue, Esq. (Argued) Robert Epstein, Esq. Kai N. Scott, Esq. Federal Community Defender Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania 601 Walnut Street The Curtis Center, Suite 540 West Philadelphia, PA 19106 Attorneys for Appellant Glorious Shavers Paul J. Hetznecker, Esq. (Argued) Suite 911 1420 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19102 Attorney for Appellant Jermel Lewis Carina Laguzzi, Esq. Laguzzi & Associates 1500 John F. Kennedy Boulevard Suite 200 Philadelphia, PA 19102 Attorney for Appellant Andrew White Robert A. Zauzmer, Esq. (Argued) Arlene D. Fisk, Esq. Office of United States Attorney 615 Chestnut Street Suite 1250 Philadelphia, PA 19106 Attorneys for Appellee 3 __________________ OPINION __________________ CHAGARES, Circuit Judge. This is a consolidated appeal by three codefendants, Glorious Shavers, Andrew White, and Jermel Lewis (collectively referred to as the “appellants”), who were convicted of robbery affecting interstate commerce, conspiracy to commit robbery affecting interstate commerce, witness tampering, and using and carrying firearms during and in relation to a crime of violence.
  • Widening the Antimafia Net: Child Protection and the Socio-Cultural

    Widening the Antimafia Net: Child Protection and the Socio-Cultural

    YJJ0010.1177/1473225418791420Youth JusticeSergi 791420research-article2018 Original Article Youth Justice 1 –20 Widening the Antimafia Net: © The Author(s) 2018 Reprints and permissions: Child Protection and the sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav https://doi.org/10.1177/1473225418791420DOI: 10.1177/1473225418791420 Socio-Cultural Transmission of journals.sagepub.com/home/yjj Mafia Behaviours in Calabria Anna Sergi Abstract This article explores proceedings by the Youth Tribunal of Reggio Calabria, Southern Italy, aimed at the protection of children in families where one or both parents are investigated for mafia offences. The findings show that preventing the transmission of mafia (‘ndrangheta) culture in the local context has become an essential part of child protection measures. This article will argue that when discussing child protection in criminal families, it is necessary (a) to question the nature of the bonds of these families with the socio- cultural context, and (b) to concretely assess the way this context wishes to affect the family’s criminality. Keywords child welfare, criminal families, cultural transmission, Italy, mafia, organised crime, youth justice Introduction ‘Ndrangheta is the collective name given to mafia clans in the Calabrian region at the toe of Italy. Antimafia prosecutors in Italy claim that the ‘ndrangheta is the most powerful mafia both in Italy and also abroad (DNA, 2017). Indeed most contemporary literature on the ‘ndrangheta highlights its global reach, its mobility and its capacity to penetrate and dominate various legal and illegal markets nationally and transnationally (Sergi and Lavorgna, 2016). This article examines the ways in which the Youth Tribunal in Reggio Calabria – and in Reggio Calabria only in the whole of Italy – is attempting to break mafia power locally, by affecting the way mafia culture and behaviours are transmitted and learned in mafia families.
  • STATE V. ORTIZ—CONCURRENCE BISHOP, J., Concurring in Part and Concurring in the Judgment

    STATE V. ORTIZ—CONCURRENCE BISHOP, J., Concurring in Part and Concurring in the Judgment

    ****************************************************** The ``officially released'' date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ``officially released'' date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ``officially released'' date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecti- cut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Con- necticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be repro- duced and distributed without the express written per- mission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ****************************************************** STATE v. ORTIZÐCONCURRENCE BISHOP, J., concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. I believe that the evidence at trial was suffi- cient to convict the defendant, Akov Ortiz, of tampering with a witness in violation of General Statutes § 53a- 151 (a), not for the reasons stated by the majority, but because the trial evidence permitted the jury reasonably to infer, from the defendant's threatening behavior toward the victim, that he intended to prevent the victim from testifying at trial.
  • Ground Lost and Found in Criminal Discovery Roger J

    Ground Lost and Found in Criminal Discovery Roger J

    University of California, Hastings College of the Law UC Hastings Scholarship Repository Published Scholarship The onorH able Roger J. Traynor Collection 1964 Ground Lost and Found in Criminal Discovery Roger J. Traynor Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.uchastings.edu/traynor_scholarship_pub Recommended Citation Roger J. Traynor, Ground Lost and Found in Criminal Discovery , 39 N.Y.U. L. REV. 228 (1964). Available at: http://repository.uchastings.edu/traynor_scholarship_pub/21 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the The onorH able Roger J. Traynor Collection at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Published Scholarship by an authorized administrator of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 7c Ti, L GROUND LOST AND FOUND IN CRIMINAL DISCOVERY ROGER J. TRAYNOR Reprinted from New York University Law Review April 1964, Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 228-250 New York University School of Law Arthur T. Vanderbilt Hall 40 Washington Square South New York, N. Y. 10003 Q Copyright, 1964, by New York University GROUND LOST AND FOUND IN CRIMINAL DISCOVERY ROGER J. TRAYNOR system is that it elicits a reasonable T HEapproximation plea for the ofadversary the truth. The reasoning is that with each side on its mettle to present its own case and to challenge its op- ponent's, the relevant unprivileged evidence in the main emerges in the ensuing clash. Such reasoning is hardly realistic unless the evidence is accessible in advance to the adversaries so that each can prepare accordingly in the light of such evidence.
  • The Forfeiture by Wrongdoing Exception To

    The Forfeiture by Wrongdoing Exception To

    THE FORFEITURE BY WRONGDOING EXCEPTION TO THE CONFRONTATION RULE * JAMESMARKHAM JULY 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction.................................................................................................................1 I. Background..........................................................................................................4 II. The Forfeiture Exception to the Crawford Rule..................................................4 A.A Note on Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(6)..............................................5 B.Intent to silence...............................................................................................7 1.Cases Finding No Intent-to-Silence Requirement......................................8 2. Cases Preserving the Intent-to-Silence Requirement.................................9 C.Reflexive Application of the Forfeiture Rule...............................................11 1.Cases Applying Forfeiture Reflexively....................................................13 2.Cases Refusing to Apply Forfeiture Reflexively.....................................16 D.Standard of Proof..........................................................................................17 Conclusion................................................................................................................19 INTRODUCTION The Supreme Court’s decision in Crawford v. Washington1 transformed its doctrine governing the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution. UnderCrawford, the Confrontation
  • Witness Tampering Is Against the Law!

    Witness Tampering Is Against the Law!

    WITNESS TAMPERING IS AGAINST THE LAW THE DEFENDANT SHOULD NEVER THREATEN OR BRIBE YOU! If someone is trying to stop you from going to court or telling the truth in court you can get help with a SAFETY PLAN: WITNESS The ASU Diane Halle Center for Family Justice TAMPERING IS (602) 258-1656 It is against the law for the defendant AGAINST THE to offer a bribe to a victim or witness. Phoenix Family Advocacy Center (602) 534-2120 or (888) 246-0303 LAW! What is a bribe? Under the law a bribe is a promise of Voice for Victims “any benefit” to a witness to stay (480) 600-2661 or (602) 416-6780 quiet, lie, or not show up in court. The Arizona Coalition Against Domestic Violence Examples: (602) 279-2900 or (800) 782-6400 Each of the following statements could be a bribe: “If you testify . Maricopa County Attorney’s Office “I will stop beating you.” Investigations Division (602) 506-8370 “I will pay the rent.” If someone bribes you or “I will buy you a car." Remember… threatens to stop you from “I will buy the kids presents.” If you need immediate help or if you are in an emergency, testifying in court, you may be a victim of “witness tampering.” call 9-1-1 right away! *Witness tampering is the most common crime committed KNOW THE LAW ON against abuse victims. *Please share widely* WITNESS TAMPERING *Help us stop it! The ASU Diane Halle Center for Family Justice By Hannah Burnidge, 3L & Prof. Sarah Buel with thanks to the many who gave suggestions.