938 users online (179 members and 759 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 109
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Southern Indiana
    Posts
    1,742

    Obstruction of Justice;Accessory to a crime: Is there a case against the Anthony's #3

    Below is the Florida Statue for Obstruction of Justice and Impeding an investigation.


    B843.01 Resisting officer with violence to his or her person.—
    Whoever knowingly and willfully resists, obstructs, or opposes any officer as defined in s. 943.10(1), (2), (3), (6), (7), (8), or (9); member of the Parole Commission or any administrative aide or supervisor employed by the commission; parole and probation supervisor; county probation officer; personnel or representative of the Department of Law Enforcement; or other person legally authorized to execute process in the execution of legal process or in the lawful execution of any legal duty, by offering or doing violence to the person of such officer or legally authorized person, is guilty of a felony of the third degree.Obstruction of justice is the crime of interfering with the administration and due process of the law, including any criminal proceeding or investigation. Obstruction can be either a federal crime or a state crime, depending on the type of proceeding interfered with. To be guilty of obstruction of justice, a person must have knowledge of an investigation or proceeding and attempt to influence it.

    The definition of obstruction is very broad and includes any interference with the application of the law, so there are many offenses that can be considered obstruction of justice. Some examples include:
    • Lying to police during questioning;
    • Falsifying or destroying documents sought by the police during an investigation;
    • Attempting to influence a jury or witness.

    The right of individuals to remain silent only allows them to refuse to answer police questions. If they answer and lie, this is not protected and is obstruction.
    What Is the Penalty for Obstruction of Justice?

    Since there are so many offenses that can constitute obstruction of justice, the penalty will vary based on the severity of the offense. Penalties can range from simple fines to jail time of up to ten years.
    Do I Need a Lawyer?

    If you have been accused of any crime, you should speak to a criminal defense lawyer immediately. A lawyer can advise you of your rights and defenses under the law and represent you in court.





    Here is my thought I wonder if G&C will be charged before trial and then told if they tesify truthfully they will drop the charges but if they lie while on the stand they will be held on this charge as well as purjury.

    I also think they took paperwork and the home computers with the last search warrent so they could prove that G&C knew more and were not telling LE therefore impeding the investigation.
    Last edited by JBean; 12-16-2008 at 01:01 AM. Reason: created a new thread using posts from other threads
    JMHO
    Kimmer



    "A lie gets half way around the world before the truth can gets its pants on" Winston Churchill

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,042
    Quote Originally Posted by SuziQ View Post
    I don't think it's OT...I'm interested!

    Okay the, I am listing statute which describes the conduct which triggers an accessory charge.


    I feel it's important to take a look at this law.

    It's my humble opinion that a certain portion of the post-crime activities which we have observed, or of which we have knowledge, are covered under this criminal definition and not under the already defined "Obstruction."

    I just want to be sure we all see that although certain offensive acts might not be covered by the Obstruction laws, that won't be an indicator of an easy out.
    That loophole is plugged by this statute here!

    Please note that the exclusion from punishment, that is delineated for relatives of the original perpetrator (including parents of the accused) does not apply to serious felonies of the type we have here.

    I would also add that it is not necessary under the law, for the original perpetrator, Casey, to have been convicted, for these charges to stand against accessories, as this statute is written.
    Could result in quite an "Oops."




    Title XLVI
    CRIMES Chapter 777
    PRINCIPAL; ACCESSORY; ATTEMPT; SOLICITATION; CONSPIRACY View Entire Chapter

    777.03 Accessory after the fact.--

    (1)(a) Any person not standing in the relation of husband or wife, parent or grandparent, child or grandchild, brother or sister, by consanguinity or affinity to the offender, who maintains or assists the principal or an accessory before the fact, or gives the offender any other aid, knowing that the offender had committed a crime and such crime was a third degree felony, or had been an accessory thereto before the fact, with the intent that the offender avoids or escapes detection, arrest, trial, or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.

    (b) Any person who maintains or assists the principal or accessory before the fact, or gives the offender any other aid, knowing that the offender had committed the offense of child abuse, neglect of a child, aggravated child abuse, aggravated manslaughter of a child under 18 years of age, or murder of a child under 18 years of age, or had been an accessory thereto before the fact, with the intent that the offender avoids or escapes detection, arrest, trial, or punishment, is an accessory after the fact unless the court finds that the person is a victim of domestic violence.

    (c) Any person who maintains or assists the principal or an accessory before the fact, or gives the offender any other aid, knowing that the offender had committed a crime and such crime was a capital, life, first degree, or second degree felony, or had been an accessory thereto before the fact, with the intent that the offender avoids or escapes detection, arrest, trial, or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.

    (2)(a) If the felony offense committed is a capital felony, the offense of accessory after the fact is a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

    (b) If the felony offense committed is a life felony or a felony of the first degree, the offense of accessory after the fact is a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

    (c) If the felony offense committed is a felony of the second degree or a felony of the third degree ranked in level 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 under s. 921.0022 or s. 921.0023, the offense of accessory after the fact is a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

    (d) If the felony offense committed is a felony of the third degree ranked in level 1 or level 2 under s. 921.0022 or s. 921.0023, the offense of accessory after the fact is a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

    (3) Except as otherwise provided in s. 921.0022, for purposes of sentencing under chapter 921 and determining incentive gain-time eligibility under chapter 944, the offense of accessory after the fact is ranked two levels below the ranking under s. 921.0022 or s. 921.0023 of the felony offense committed.


  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,042
    Quote Originally Posted by Paintr View Post
    Great post, MH! I think the key word here is 'knowing'. Can they prove the A's 'knowingly' did all this? How can that be proven i this case?


    The proof of the "knowingly" part of crimes is done by having the prosecution paint an entire picture of the events which have occurred.

    The jury is instructed on the elements of the crime and they are also instructed on the inferences they can choose to draw from testimony they have heard.

    Prosecutors are used to overcoming the hurdle of the "Knowingly "element.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,042
    Quote Originally Posted by tehcloser View Post
    The fact that they have no plans to say anything in the near future...says it all. They know they are in deep chit.

    As I have been posting in another thread, to a point where I may be babbling

    I believe the A's have left the territory of Obstruction (misdemeanor) and have strolled into the valley of Criminal Accessory after the fact. (felony).

    jmho

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,042
    Quote Originally Posted by jennyb View Post
    ITA. What do the A's have that the prosecutors need at this point? Why shouldn't they be charged if they've obstructed or worse? The ball is NOT in their court anymore.

    Like I said earlier, if someone would like to point me to a *family member* statute that excuses criminal wrongdoing I'd love to see it.
    Quote Originally Posted by impatientredhead View Post
    I of course cannot provide a statute, but I can point you to case after case after case of family members not intervening before a crime became worse, where family members absolutely did not help the prosecution, where family member did not share their real beliefs of what may have happened, where family members did not share prior history. None ever charged with anything.

    If the Anthony's had something to do with Caylee's death they will be charged of course, if they knowingly destroyed evidence, moved the body or any of the other things eluded to here they will be charged. The pants and knife being washed will never hold up to a prosecutable level.


    I am only here for a minute so apologies if a repeat.
    I had posted the applicable statute with an explanation of why the Anthony family might have qualified for a "family-member exclusion" but do not fit into the category.

    I am going to paste in my old post to save time. I hope that's okay. If not please delete.

    Okay then, I am listing statute which describes the conduct which triggers an accessory charge.


    I feel it's important to take a look at this law.

    It's my humble opinion that a certain portion of the post-crime activities which we have observed, or of which we have knowledge, are covered under this criminal definition and not under the already defined "Obstruction."

    I just want to be sure we all see that although certain offensive acts might not be covered by the Obstruction laws, that won't be an indicator of an easy out.
    That loophole is plugged by this statute here!

    Please note that the exclusion from punishment, that is delineated for relatives of the original perpetrator (including parents of the accused) does not apply to serious felonies of the type we have here.

    I would also add that it is not necessary under the law, for the original perpetrator, Casey, to have been convicted, for these charges to stand against accessories, as this statute is written.
    Could result in quite an "Oops."




    Title XLVI
    CRIMES Chapter 777
    PRINCIPAL; ACCESSORY; ATTEMPT; SOLICITATION; CONSPIRACY View Entire Chapter

    777.03 Accessory after the fact.--

    (1)(a) Any person not standing in the relation of husband or wife, parent or grandparent, child or grandchild, brother or sister, by consanguinity or affinity to the offender, who maintains or assists the principal or an accessory before the fact, or gives the offender any other aid, knowing that the offender had committed a crime and such crime was a third degree felony, or had been an accessory thereto before the fact, with the intent that the offender avoids or escapes detection, arrest, trial, or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.

    (b) Any person who maintains or assists the principal or accessory before the fact, or gives the offender any other aid, knowing that the offender had committed the offense of child abuse, neglect of a child, aggravated child abuse, aggravated manslaughter of a child under 18 years of age, or murder of a child under 18 years of age, or had been an accessory thereto before the fact, with the intent that the offender avoids or escapes detection, arrest, trial, or punishment, is an accessory after the fact unless the court finds that the person is a victim of domestic violence.

    (c) Any person who maintains or assists the principal or an accessory before the fact, or gives the offender any other aid, knowing that the offender had committed a crime and such crime was a capital, life, first degree, or second degree felony, or had been an accessory thereto before the fact, with the intent that the offender avoids or escapes detection, arrest, trial, or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.

    (2)(a) If the felony offense committed is a capital felony, the offense of accessory after the fact is a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

    (b) If the felony offense committed is a life felony or a felony of the first degree, the offense of accessory after the fact is a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

    (c) If the felony offense committed is a felony of the second degree or a felony of the third degree ranked in level 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10 under s. 921.0022 or s. 921.0023, the offense of accessory after the fact is a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

    (d) If the felony offense committed is a felony of the third degree ranked in level 1 or level 2 under s. 921.0022 or s. 921.0023, the offense of accessory after the fact is a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

    (3) Except as otherwise provided in s. 921.0022, for purposes of sentencing under chapter 921 and determining incentive gain-time eligibility under chapter 944, the offense of accessory after the fact is ranked two levels below the ranking under s. 921.0022 or s. 921.0023 of the felony offense committed.



    If a repeat just ignore. Have a great night all!!!

  6. #6
    Ezryder9's Avatar
    Ezryder9 is offline Yes it's a Harley and no, you can't ride it!
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,384
    Quote Originally Posted by MiraclesHappen View Post
    As I have been posting in another thread, to a point where I may be babbling

    I believe the A's have left the territory of Obstruction (misdemeanor) and have strolled into the valley of Criminal Accessory after the fact. (felony).

    jmho
    Thanks for these wonderful posts, MH. I've been thinking recently (that's a novelty with me sometimes...) that accessory after the fact may be a more applicable avenue. What's the statute of limitations for charging this? Is it possible for LE/SA to continue with the Caylee case, and keep the Anthonys potential charges for later? Would that give LE the chance to have their cake and eat it, too? Like, have use of the A's testimony and then charge them after the murder trial? Seems like I'm kinda being cold-hearted, and I'm not saying one way or the other that I think that's what they should do; merely asking if this is something that could do.
    Unless substantiated with a link, all comments are nothing more than my personal opinion. And opinions are like, well, noses; we all have one.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,158
    My head is swimming with too much information, so I'm wondering if anyone else can help me out or heard/saw this. It was an appearance by the pretty, smart, articulate blond state's attorney (or former one, or current one from another FLA jurisdiction) who often appears as a "talking head" about this case. I thought I heard her say that the accessory statute had been very recently amended to do away with an exception that precluded close family members from being charged with the crime. I'd look for a transcript, but I can't remember where I saw her, though I think it was yesterday. Anyone?

  8. #8
    curiositycat's Avatar
    curiositycat is offline The one thing that doesn't abide by majority rule is a person's conscience
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Northern New Mexico
    Posts
    4,948
    Quote Originally Posted by amethyst221 View Post
    My head is swimming with too much information, so I'm wondering if anyone else can help me out or heard/saw this. It was an appearance by the pretty, smart, articulate blond state's attorney (or former one, or current one from another FLA jurisdiction) who often appears as a "talking head" about this case. I thought I heard her say that the accessory statute had been very recently amended to do away with an exception that precluded close family members from being charged with the crime. I'd look for a transcript, but I can't remember where I saw her, though I think it was yesterday. Anyone?
    She was on Fox News yesterday or the day before. Can't think of her name either but someone on here said she practices in Florida and is a real Bulldog.
    "Curiosity killed the cat, but for a while I was a suspect" Steven Wright

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    490
    Quote Originally Posted by amethyst221 View Post
    My head is swimming with too much information, so I'm wondering if anyone else can help me out or heard/saw this. It was an appearance by the pretty, smart, articulate blond state's attorney (or former one, or current one from another FLA jurisdiction) who often appears as a "talking head" about this case. I thought I heard her say that the accessory statute had been very recently amended to do away with an exception that precluded close family members from being charged with the crime. I'd look for a transcript, but I can't remember where I saw her, though I think it was yesterday. Anyone?
    SLOW SERVER...tried *3* times to get this post to you...

    SLOW SERVER--this is my 3rd try at replying...


    You are thinking of Pam Bondi. She was on Geraldo's show on Saturday, which I know PattyG has graciously taped and posted on the board.

    The jist of what she said was up until recently, Florida law didn't allow for parents of a defendant to be charged with obstruction since the thinking was that surely parents would try to help their children and in fact, possibly obstruct.

    That statute, according to her, has been reversed, leaving the door open for the parents in this case, to face charges. I hope that helps.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    795
    Quote Originally Posted by amethyst221 View Post
    My head is swimming with too much information, so I'm wondering if anyone else can help me out or heard/saw this. It was an appearance by the pretty, smart, articulate blond state's attorney (or former one, or current one from another FLA jurisdiction) who often appears as a "talking head" about this case. I thought I heard her say that the accessory statute had been very recently amended to do away with an exception that precluded close family members from being charged with the crime. I'd look for a transcript, but I can't remember where I saw her, though I think it was yesterday. Anyone?
    I think I saw her Saturday night on Geraldo's show. She's actually a prosecutor in Florida, if I recall. And the amendment is true - it was only recently passed that family members can be charged in connection with a crime.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    33,799
    Quote Originally Posted by amethyst221 View Post
    My head is swimming with too much information, so I'm wondering if anyone else can help me out or heard/saw this. It was an appearance by the pretty, smart, articulate blond state's attorney (or former one, or current one from another FLA jurisdiction) who often appears as a "talking head" about this case. I thought I heard her say that the accessory statute had been very recently amended to do away with an exception that precluded close family members from being charged with the crime. I'd look for a transcript, but I can't remember where I saw her, though I think it was yesterday. Anyone?
    I don't know when or if it was changed, but in post #5 in orange print it does say they are not from excluded in serious crimes.

    Come to think of it, I bet that law was changed because of not being able to charge Couey's family for helping him. Thanks for bring that up!

  12. #12
    curiositycat's Avatar
    curiositycat is offline The one thing that doesn't abide by majority rule is a person's conscience
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Northern New Mexico
    Posts
    4,948
    I believe the woman was on Geraldo Rivera's show Saturday night at 8pm. I can't remember her name either but someone here says she practices in Florida and is a real good attorney, a bulldog.
    "Curiosity killed the cat, but for a while I was a suspect" Steven Wright

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    STEELER COUNTRY!
    Posts
    27,332
    I was listening to a radio show and the one guy said that the ants probably will be charged with the above, but not now because it would be bad PR on LE when grand parents are grieving. A jury may take it bad........LE will wait awhile..............

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    17,118
    is it me or could there be a slow server problems with repeat??? lol

    what would be the deference between the state charging or Federal charges (i know location, location, location....)---could they both?????

    thanks
    jmo

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    1,372
    IMO b and c fit make me believe that the Anthony's could most definately be held accountable for accessory after the fact.

    b) Any person who maintains or assists the principal or accessory before the fact, or gives the offender any other aid, knowing that the offender had committed the offense of child abuse, neglect of a child, aggravated child abuse, aggravated manslaughter of a child under 18 years of age, or murder of a child under 18 years of age, or had been an accessory thereto before the fact, with the intent that the offender avoids or escapes detection, arrest, trial, or punishment, is an accessory after the fact unless the court finds that the person is a victim of domestic violence.
    c) Any person who maintains or assists the principal or an accessory before the fact, or gives the offender any other aid, knowing that the offender had committed a crime and such crime was a capital, life, first degree, or second degree felony, or had been an accessory thereto before the fact, with the intent that the offender avoids or escapes detection, arrest, trial, or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.
    I think about you constantly, whether it's with my mind or my heart. ~Albany Bach Reid

Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Diane Fanning True Crime author on the Anthony Case
    By Levi in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 11-02-2010, 01:12 AM
  2. Could Lee Anthony face charges for obstruction of justice? PART TWO
    By Tom'sGirl in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 344
    Last Post: 01-18-2009, 03:12 PM
  3. Does Anyone in the Anthony Family Want Justice for Caylee?
    By kathyn2 in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 209
    Last Post: 01-10-2009, 06:00 PM
  4. Could Lee Anthony face charges for obstruction of justice?
    By Angel Who Cares in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 664
    Last Post: 12-30-2008, 02:03 PM
  5. Anthony Family Inconsistencies #3 Obstruction charges? perjury? Mistrial?
    By JADEPRINCESS in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 128
    Last Post: 12-15-2008, 03:16 PM