Along with arresting a mentally ill person that the FBI assisted at every step of the way in creating a fake car bomb for Fort Riley, the FBI has conjured out of thin air an obligation to rat out anyone you know or suspect may be about to commit a federal crime.
The FBI wants a nation of informers to pad it files with reports. We all know how well that worked in East Germany. Why not in the United States? A toxic brew of suspicion and distrust, of everyone. Your family, in-laws, children, acquaintances at work, etc.
I don’t have an explanation for why the FBI wants such a social policy but I can point to a case in point where they argue for it. Take a look at the complaint filed in April 10, 2015 against Alexander E. Blair.
Blair was charged with violating Title 18, United States Code, Section 4, misprison of felony.
Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
Joseph Broadbent explains misprison of felony (the following is not legal advice, for legal advice contact an attorney) as follows:
“Misprision of felony” is a crime that occurs when someone knows a felony has been committed, but fails to inform the authorities about it. The crime originated in English common law and required that citizens report crimes or face criminal prosecution. (Common law is law originating from custom and court decisions rather than statutes.)
Due to the harshness of imprisoning people merely for failing to report a crime, most states chose not to include misprision of felony in their criminal laws. Instead, conduct that would fit the misprision definition is covered by other laws, such as those dealing with accomplice liability.
Federal Law
First enacted into U.S. law in 1789, misprision of a felony in the federal system is a felony punishable by a fine and up to three years in prison. The common-law rule criminalized simply knowing about a felony and not notifying the authorities. But contemporary federal law also requires that the defendant take some affirmative act to conceal the felony. The crime has four elements:
- a completed felony
- the defendant knowing about the felony’s commission
- the defendant failing to notify a proper law enforcement authority, and
- the defendant taking some affirmative step to conceal the felony.
(18 U.S.C. §4.)
Typical acts of concealment include making false statements, hiding evidence, and harboring the felon. Whether someone’s actions amount to concealment is for the jury to decide.
Suppose Marty knows his neighbor, Biff, is growing marijuana. Marty wouldn’t be guilty of federal misprision simply for remaining silent. But if he lies to the police about Biff’s growing, he’s committed the crime.
Although the crime has a broad definition, misprision prosecutions are uncommon. Prosecutors usually reserve misprision charges for people with special duties to report crimes, such as prison guards and elected officials. That said, nothing in the statute’s language limits it to such cases. The authorities might invoke it for certain types of crimes where the government wants to encourage reporting, like treason and terrorism.
The FBI had these facts about Alexander E. Blair:
…agents contacted and interviewed Blair immediately after Booker’s arrest on April 10, 2015. During the interview, Blair admitted that he knew about Booker’s plan to detonate the VBIED. He further stated that he knew Booker believed he (Booker) was acting on behalf of ISIL; he knew Booker was gathering materials for constructing the VBIED; he knew Booker intended to deliver the device onto Fort Riley; and, he knew that Booker planned to kill as many soldiers as possible. Blair admitted to agents that he loaned money to Booker for rental of the storage unit, knowing that the unit would be used to store and construct the VBIED. Blair also advised agents that he urged Booker to cease talking openly about his intentions to conduct an attack for fear of attracting public attention and being reported to law enforcement. Blair told agents that he believed he had in fact been recently put under law enforcement surveillance. Finally, Blair told agents that he believed Booker would carry out the attack but chose not to alert authorities and report Booker’s actions.
Knowing the elements of Title 18, Section 4, let’s see how those compare to the complaint:
- a completed felony ✔
- the defendant knowing about the felony’s commission ✔
- the defendant failing to notify a proper law enforcement authority, and ✔
- the defendant taking some affirmative step to conceal the felony. Opps!
No lying to the FBI, no attempt to conceal the felony, no misprison of felony.
A first year law student could have worked that out without any prompting.
It is fair to note that loaning money to someone in furtherance of the commission of a criminal act generates other questions of criminal liability but it isn’t misprison of felony.
I suspect the real reason the FBI keeps assisting mentally ill people and big talkers with terrorist activities is because it can’t find enough real terrorists in the United States. Rather than simply admit that terrorism as a domestic crime is a rare as crimes get, the FBI manufactures terrorist plots so it can ask for more anti-terrorist funding.
There was Oklahoma City, 9/11, the Boston Marthon, Olympic Park in Atlanta, the New York guy who set his car on fire, so what five (5) in twenty years? Can you imagine if there were only five murders, five rapes, or five armed robberies in twenty years?
On one hand, don’t tell me you are about to commit a felony but on the other, let’s not become East Germany. OK?
So it sounds like all citizens have an obligation to report the 47 Senators who signed the treasonous letter to Iran since it violates the Logan Act.
“Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply himself, or his agent, to any foreign government, or the agents thereof, for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.”
I wonder how well the FBI could handle 10s of millions of reports on the same act?
Comment by clemp — April 13, 2015 @ 7:18 am
Carl,
Great idea but I suspect the FBI would treat those reports differently.
I say that because once upon a time I obtained an arrest warrant for a state trooper who had lied under oath in open court. Had testified “this” was the money seized in a drug bust when in fact the money in question was printed years after the bust. He had gone to the bank during the trial to make sure the denominations matched another officers’ report.
When I gave it to the local Sheriff’s office, they said it looked like a political problem. I replied that it looked like an arrest warrant to me. 😉
Needless to say the trooper was never arrested and the local grand jury declined to indict him for perjury. I can’t image a clearer case of perjury or proof of it. Having the law and facts on your side doesn’t mean that you will win.
Comment by Patrick Durusau — April 13, 2015 @ 8:16 am