If you know someone is committing infant abuse, do you also commit a crime if you choose not to report it? What are a person's legal responsibilities if they believe that someone is currently committing infant abuse, but are not certain that they are doing so. For example, they might learn this from internet posts or observing my neighbor. The person who believes that this is occurring is not in a profession that specifically has a child abuse reporting requirement. Do they also commit a crime if they choose not to help the infant out or not to report it?
united-states There are many different sets of laws in the United States. This post is not a comprehensive survey of every U.S. state and district and territory's laws on the subject. I also do not identify every single federal law reporting requirement that applies nationally. Child Abuse Specific Duties To Report Crimes Who Must Report Child Abuse? Every U.S. state, territory and district provides that people in certain professions must report to the proper authorities all cases of child abuse of which they become aware. These &quot;mandatory reporters&quot; generally include parents, teachers, school administrators, clergy, medical professionals, therapists, social workers, and others. There is also a federal mandatory child abuse reporter law applicable to potential reporters on federal land or in a federally operated or contracted facility. 42 U.S.C. § 13,031 (2000). There are some states, however, in which anyone who suspects child abuse must report it to the proper authorities. New Jersey is one such state. Texas, Rhode Island, Wyoming, Florida, Tennessee, Utah, Delaware, and New Hampshire also have varying catch-all provisions that impose the duty to report child abuse on &quot;any person,&quot; &quot;any other person,&quot; or &quot;any person, including but not limited to [certain categories of reporters]&quot;. California and Nevada require people who personally witness a crime against a child to report it. CAL. PENAL CODE ANN. § 152.3 (2002); NEv. REV. STAT. ANN. 202.882 (2001). When Must Child Abuse Be Reported? As the first link above explains: Once a mandatory reporter witnesses an act of abuse or finds evidence of child abuse, he or she has a duty to report the incident to the appropriate authorities. That usually includes sharing important details about the incident, like the names of the victim and perpetrator. Under California's Mandatory Reporting Laws (California Penal Code Sections 11164-11174.4): A mandatory reporter does not have to actually witness a child being abused or neglected. Rather, a “reasonable suspicion” from other sources that child abuse or neglect has occurred is enough to trigger this responsibility. What Are The Consequences For Failing To Report Child Abuse When Required To Do So? Failure to report an incidence of child abuse is a misdemeanor offense in most states for people who have a duty to report it. But in cases were serious harm results it can be more serious misdemeanor. For example, in California: If a professional required to report fails to do so, that person may be charged with a misdemeanor offense punishable by: imprisonment in a county jail for up to six months, and/or a maximum fine of $1,000. But, if the unreported instance of abuse or neglect leads to death or great bodily injury, the person can be punished with: imprisonment for up to one year in county jail, and/or a maximum fine of $5,000. In practice, these statutes are usually enforced only in the clearest cases when an individual's personal duty to act was clear. Mandatory reporting laws were enacted to clarify that sense of personal duty and not leaving the task of reporting suspected child abuse to someone else. General Duties To Report Crimes Under Federal Law The main exceptions in federal law are treason and sedition for which there is a federal reporting requirement for all citizens. Another important federal law obligation under 18 U.S.C. § 4, is that you may be obligated to report a crime if you are directly asked during a criminal investigation whenever: You have knowledge of the commission of a felony; The felony actually occurred; and The felony is a federal offense; If you willfully conceal the commission of a felony federal offense, you can be charged with “misprision of a felony.” Misprision of a felony is a form of obstruction of justice. If you are convicted, you face up to a $250,000 fine, imprisonment up to three years, or both fine and imprisonment. A higher duty applies to certain federal officials charged with investigating crimes by federal officials. But, you don't usually (outside of treason and sedition cases) have an affirmative duty to contact authorities about the crime that has been committed which you are aware of unless you are actually asked about it in a criminal investigation. Under State Law The vast majority of U.S. states do not have a duty to report any kind of crime (except as explained above). But, there are at least eight U.S. states that are exceptions to the general rule. Under Texas law you can be charged with a Class A misdemeanor for failing to report an offense that resulted in serious bodily injury or death. This would arise, however, only when you learn that it actually has resulted in serious bodily injury or death, and you have reasonable certainty from your personal knowledge that indeed a crime has been committed and not merely a suspicion or a speculation. Under Texas Penal Code § 38-171: (a) A person commits an offense if the person: (1) observes the commission of a felony under circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that an offense had been committed in which serious bodily injury or death may have resulted; and (2) fails to immediately report the commission of the offense to a peace officer or law enforcement agency under circumstances in which: (A) a reasonable person would believe that the commission of the offense had not been reported; and (B) the person could immediately report the commission of the offense without placing himself or herself in danger of suffering serious bodily injury or death. (b) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor. Child abuse causing serious injury or death would generally be a felony on the person committing the child abuse (but not the person failing to report it). In Ohio it's illegal to knowingly fail to report a felony. This is a much broader requirement and could include child abuse, but again you must have reasonable certainty from your personal knowledge that indeed a crime has been committed and not merely a suspicion or a speculation. OHIO REV. CODE ANN. § 2921.22 (2002) (&quot;No person, knowing that a felony has been or is being committed, shall knowingly fail to report such information to law enforcement authorities.&quot;) And, this is not a particularly serious offense. South Dakota also has a law similar to that of Ohio. S.D. CODIFIED LAWS § 22-11-12 (2002) (&quot;Any person who, having knowledge, which is not privileged, of the commission of a felony, conceals the same, or does not immediately disclose such felony, with the name of the perpetrator thereof, and all the facts in relations thereto, to the proper authorities, shall be guilty of misprision of a felony.&quot;). Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Pennsylvania have laws that require someone who personally witnesses certain crimes to report them. See, e.g., MASS. GEN. LAWS ANN. ch. 268, § 40 (2002). There are also at least a couple of states also mirror the federal government in having mandatory reporting for the general public only for treason. See 720 ILL. COMP. STAT. ANN. 5/30-2 (2002) (&quot;A person owing allegiance to this State commits misprision of treason when he conceals or withholds his knowledge that another has committed treason against this State.&quot;); LA. REv. STAT. ANN. § 14:114 (2002) (&quot;Misprision of treason is the concealment of treason, or the failure to disclose immediately all pertinent facts to proper authorities, by a person who has knowledge of the commission of the crime of treason.&quot;). All of these offenses are only rarely enforced, but there are some prosecutions. Academic Analysis And Review of The Law Sandra Guerra Thompson has published a law review article entitled &quot;The White-Collar Police Force: &quot;Duty to Report&quot; Statutes in Criminal Law Theory&quot; 11(1) William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal 3 (2002). Relief From Civil Liability If You Report In Good Faith In Colorado, the formal duty is seemingly even more broad under Colorado Revised Statutes § 18-8-115: It is the duty of every corporation or person who has reasonable grounds to believe that a crime has been committed to report promptly the suspected crime to law enforcement authorities. Notwithstanding any other provision of the law to the contrary, a corporation or person may disclose information concerning a suspected crime to other persons or corporations for the purpose of giving notice of the possibility that other such criminal conduct may be attempted which may affect the persons or corporations notified. When acting in good faith, such corporation or person shall be immune from any civil liability for such reporting or disclosure. This duty shall exist notwithstanding any other provision of the law to the contrary; except that this section shall not require disclosure of any communication privileged by law. But breach of this duty does not actually carry any criminal penalty, although it might conceivable be a basis for civil liability (although I've never seen a lawsuit brought on this basis). Instead, the statute really exists primarily to protect people who do report crimes from any punishment for doing so. In general, even when it is not a crime to fail to report suspected child abuse, there is immunity from civil liability, either by statute, or under common law tort doctrines (called a qualified privilege) for reporting in good faith (i.e. actually believing that a crime has been committed) a suspected crime.
Yes. In a civil case, there are two parties and the case is about finding out who has which obligations to whom. In a civil case, the plaintiff has to prove that they actually incurred damage through the actions of the defendant. A criminal case is the state vs. the defendant. The "wronged party" is the society as a whole, usually represented by the prosecutor. The victim, if there is one, just plays the role of yet another witness to find out if the defendant needs to be punished and how. There are also examples of crimes which are completely victimless but still punished by some societies. For example, in many places sexual intercourse between two consenting adult siblings is a crime (incest), even though there is no victim. Also, for some crimes it is even a crime to attempt to commit it. So one can be punished in a criminal court even though they didn't actually succeed in causing any damage to anyone. Example: I throw a rock at your car. When I hit, you can sue me in a civil court and force me to pay for the repairs. When I miss, I caused no damage to you, so there is nothing you could sue about. But what if I throw a rock at you and miss? That's attempted assault, maybe even attempted murder. When law enforcement finds out about it, I could be arrested, prosecuted and convicted to a prision sentence, even though you are perfectly fine.
In the UK, generally there is no duty to report crime. There are circumstances where there is a duty to report suspicious activity or 'knowledge' or 'suspicion' of a crime. These include: financing of terrorism money laundering or dealing in other proceeds of crime (criminal property) or fraud in a regulated sector (e.g. solicitors, accountants, insolvency practitioners, finance, gambling) (unless the information comes to the person in 'privileged circumstances') In respect of such circumstances, as soon as Bob 'knows' or 'suspects' Rob is engaged in such behaviour Bob must report this to the authorities and must not tell Rob about it (the offence of 'tipping off'). Bob commits an offence if he doesn't report it. In terms of failure to report money laundering that could lead to a maximum of five years in prison and/or a fine. Depending on the circumstances an additional risk of failure to report is being perceived to have participated in the commission of the crime.
Does the law or judge ever make exceptions for events such as this? From a legal standpoint, your friend is at high risk of being found in contempt and thus be sentenced to imprisonment. Your friend should have called 911 rather than violate the protection order under pretext of consoling her. Asking from the standpoint of whether judges ever do this or that is pointless. The answer would be &quot;yes, they make exceptions&quot; even in scenarios which are plain aberrant. However, a judge's departure of the law quite often is not a reliable standpoint for understanding the law, but the result of his/her ineptitude and unfitness for judicial office.
There is nothing illegal about the child asking for nude images, but, depending on jurisdiction and circumstances, there is quite likely to be a serious legal problem with the adult providing such nudes. The exact laws that might be violated would depend a lot on the jurisdiction. The detailed facts would also be significant. But such a situation is fraught with danger, for the adult. Even if there is no ill-intent, such actions could easily be misinterpreted, and might be technically unlawful regardless of intent. Of course, not all nudes are obscene, or even &quot;inappropriate for children&quot;. Which are so classified depends on the laws of the particular jurisdiction.
Even before the police have any idea who did it, Bob is guilty of whatever wrong he did. However, if you want this to be a legal question and not a moral one, we should assume that you really want to know "Can Bob be convicted of murder, if the evidence proves that he did do it?". Yes, he can. See Morris v. State, 214 S.W.3d 159. The critical question was whether the defendant understood the charges (he did) and whether he could assist in his defense (he could). The desideratum of being able to assist in your own defense only goes so far. On the other hand, maybe no, per Wilson v. US. A government expert witness "testified that appellant had permanent retrograde amnesia and would not be able to aid in his own defense in terms of remembering any of the acts alleged in the indictment". The crucial difference seems to be whether one just has loss of memory, vs. loss of memory connected with some other mental disorder. [Addendum] Per Dusky v. United States 362 U.S. 402, competence to stand trial depends on whether the accused has sufficient present ability to consult with his lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding -- and whether he has a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him. I am not aware of any exceptions e.g. whether this is not the case with strict liability crimes like statutory rape, and since it is generally held that "competency" is a requirement mandated by the due process clause, I don't think there could be an exception.
Since there are cases where it is legal to break into a car, is it legal to publish a guide on how to break into a car online? It is legal to publish this guide. Indeed, it is legal to do so even if there are no cases where it is legal to do so. Does it need to have a disclaimer saying to comply with all applicable laws? No. Could the author be held responsible if someone uses the instructions to illegally break into a car? Generally not. I could imagine that there might be some very specific and exceptional fact pattern where it might, but that would be the rare exception. But see man sentenced to twenty-years in prison after pledging support to ISIS and uploading a bomb making video related to that pledge.
First of all, Sally can't charge Bob, or anyone else. She can file a complaint with the police, or with the District Attorney. It may or may not be investigated, and if it is, charges may or may not be brought, and she has no control over any of that, although she may be able to use persuasion or political pressure to influence the decision. In New York, persuading a child to make pornography is a class C felony. Possessing child pornography is a class E felony. Promoting an obscene sexual performance by a child is a class D felony. Disseminating obscene material to a minor is a class E felony, unless the defendant solicits the child to engage in sexual activity, in which case it's a class D felony. All of these have 5-year statutes of limitation. (N.Y. Pen. Law § § 70.00, 80.00, 235.21, 235.22, 263.05, 263.10, 263.11, 263.16.) I can't find any NY law that makes it a crime to ask for a naked image of a child and be refused, although there may well be one. Note that it is not a crime in NY to posses sexual or nude pictures of a person 16 or older, although it is a crime to create them. There are also federal laws against child pornography, but federal policy is not to bring federal cases where the accused are under 18 and a state case could be brought. In fact, the federal authorities generally do not bring cases except against major producers when a state case can be brought instead. But that is a matter of policy, not law. NY has a pre-trial diversion program for teen-ages involved in "sexting". They can agree to take special classes, and avoid a criminal conviction or any jail time. The court must approve candidates individually for this program, but it is widely used. In the given scenario, the statute of limitations would not have expired (if the law I couldn't find makes this a felony, misdemeanor SoL is 2 years). In theory bob could be charged and tried for his solicitation. If charges were levied, the prosecution would need to prove at trial that Bob had made the request, and that it was serious, not a joke. It would also need to persuade a jury to convict when no sexual image had ever been transmitted. In practice I doubt that a case would be pursued after several years. That would depend entirely on the DA, or the relevant assistant DA who handled the case. Nothing would legally prevent such a case that I know of.