As any parent and former teenager knows, there's lots of peer pressure to participate in behavior that pushes them to the edge of legality. And kids see plenty of misconduct. But when someone does not actually commit the crime, can he or she still be criminally responsible?
It depends.
In Florida the old accomplice "aiding and abetting" concept is called "principal in the first degree". To aid and abet as a "principal" means to help the perpetrator, or person who actually committed the crime, by doing or saying something that caused it or encouraged, incited or assisted the perpetrator. Before a defendant may be convicted as an aider and abettor, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt not only that the defendant assisted the perpetrator but that the defendant had the specific intent to participate in that crime. A principal is subject to the same punishment as the perpetrator. Pretty harsh.
As an experienced criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor, I was asked my opinion by Bay News 9 today about a recent high profile case where several teens observed but did not report locker room assaults by some other teammates. While their inaction is reprehensible, there is no duty to report or stop a crime. If they did not join in or facilitate the crime, they merely are witnesses. What if they cheered the perpetrators on? Does that suffice as encouragement under this law? Not likely. How about if they "put them up to it"? That's closer to the technical definition. What if they were look outs or helped plan the attack? Most definitely.
The moral? Kids should always choose their friends carefully. When you hang with those who test the limits, when things go south they go south in a hurry and it may not take much to become a principal.
See the video at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1XpFRpuq3o
Read the story at:
http://www.baynews9.com/content/36/2009/8/12/507720.html?title=New+investigation+sought+in+school+rape+case
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
