How far does the obligation to report a crime go?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TantumDicVerbo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TantumDicVerbo

Guest
As a hypothetical. I was pondering this the other day and couldn’t reach a solid answer.

Say John commits a crime against Jane Doe, a crime that deserves jail time and one John should be jailed for (like some form of violence, or serious theft, etc.)

However, for ABC reason, Jane decides not to report the crime. She then tells a friend about the crime, and asks her not to report the crime either.

Is Jane doing wrong by deciding not to report the crime? If so, is the friend bound to go against her friend’s wishes and report the crime?
 
I think a great understanding of culture and moral law needs to be needed.

Here’s is a case where I would think the friend would do harm.

I heard a talk from a Hmong woman, I think, about sexual violence. The culture of traditional Hmong is very different than you or I. Bottom line is, the female would be forced to marry the offender out of family honor if I remember correctly. In this culture, there is no such thing as r_pe. This is hard for a Christian to hear, so I want to remind that what I said was my opinion.

I hope what I said makes sense.

God Bless
 
John commits a crime against Jane and Jane doesn’t report it - is that wrong - is that the question? No it isn’t wrong unless Jane is under some compulsion to do that such as an existing law or workplace policy that would require it. Clearly that would make Jane’s failure a criminal act or a violation of policy.

But outside of those things there is nothing that requires anyone to report a crime against themselves. That doesn’t take away any of the moral consequences of the crime, however. As for the friend, what is you think would bind her outside of the bonds of friendship? Most times a report by C that A committed a crime against B won’t go anywhere because the third party is not a witness and can only offer hearsay testimony, which is no testimony that carries any evidential weight.
 
TantumDicVerbo said:
As a hypothetical. I was pondering this the other day and couldn’t reach a solid answer.

Say John commits a crime against Jane Doe, a crime that deserves jail time and one John should be jailed for (like some form of violence, or serious theft, etc.)

However, for ABC reason, Jane decides not to report the crime. She then tells a friend about the crime, and asks her not to report the crime either.

Is Jane doing wrong by deciding not to report the crime? If so, is the friend bound to go against her friend’s wishes and report the crime?
Click to expand...
If the friend DID report the crime, Jane still has to be the one to press charges against John, be a witness, testify, etc. If she is not willing to do any of that, then nothing happens. It becomes heresay.
 
If friend believes Jane is in danger, then friend is obligated to take action.
 
TantumDicVerbo said:
As a hypothetical. I was pondering this the other day and couldn’t reach a solid answer.

Say John commits a crime against Jane Doe, a crime that deserves jail time and one John should be jailed for (like some form of violence, or serious theft, etc.)

However, for ABC reason, Jane decides not to report the crime. She then tells a friend about the crime, and asks her not to report the crime either.

Is Jane doing wrong by deciding not to report the crime? If so, is the friend bound to go against her friend’s wishes and report the crime?
Click to expand...
I don’t think so and here is why…

Using the same scenario… Jane, who was the victim, goes to confession and during the confession this entire scenario is discussed. Would the Priest be required to report the incident to the police? Of course not. Now, I realize that I’ve put a twist in the situation, but the point I’m trying to make is that Jane has told her friend in confidence (in trust) and expects that her friend will not betray that trust (Similar to the trust we have in our Priests not to reveal what is talked about in the confessional). Perhaps, it would be a better alternative to attempt to convince Jane to report the crime that was committed against her.
 
TantumDicVerbo said:
As a hypothetical. I was pondering this the other day and couldn’t reach a solid answer.

Say John commits a crime against Jane Doe, a crime that deserves jail time and one John should be jailed for (like some form of violence, or serious theft, etc.)

However, for ABC reason, Jane decides not to report the crime. She then tells a friend about the crime, and asks her not to report the crime either.

Is Jane doing wrong by deciding not to report the crime? If so, is the friend bound to go against her friend’s wishes and report the crime?
Click to expand...
If Jane is in danger, the friend should report the crime to save her.

The situation is very different for Priests, Priests are bound to never reveal anything said in the confessional. That is a part of the sacrament.

Nothing of the kind exists when a friend tells you things in confidence.
 
It seems to me that the answer for Jane is not very clear cut. How likely is John to commit the same crime against someone else if she doesn’t report it? Does reporting it change the likelihood? Basically, is Jane assisting John to sin in the future by refusing to subject him to the consequences of his actions in the present? I don’t think there could be a cut-and-dired answer to that. It would depend on the nature of the crime and the nature of the situation.

To take a couple of very extreme examples, If John sexually assaults Jane and is then in a car accident that leaves him paralyzed, then Jane has no obligation. On the other hand, if John comes after Jane with a knife, and his modus operandi is such that Jane realizes that he is a serial killer that the police are looking for, she has a great responsibility, even though the only crime she has evidence of is against herself.

Jane’s friend may be under some obligation to try to talk Jane into reporting the crime, but other than that, I agree with everyone who says she has nothing of substance to report. She doesn’t know that the crime actually happened, although of course she will naturally want to believe her friend.

Of course, if Jane is a minor, or was a minor when the crime was committed, that is a different story altogether.
 
tjm190 said:
If friend believes Jane is in danger, then friend is obligated to take action.
Click to expand...
if Jane is a minor then reporting is required. if the alledged perpetrator is posing a danger, even implied or probable, against Jane’s children, or against anyone else, yes it must be reported

depending on the gravity of the crime and the circumstances, the friend could even be considered an accessory after the fact if he does not report.
 
Where does the idea that anyone has the obligation to report a crime (especially one against self) come from? I am speaking in general and not to the specific situations where there are, for example, very specific civil laws requiring certain reports such as child workers reporting child abuse. I am aware of no moral or civil requirments to report a crime againsrt self.
 
Here’s a fuller scoop (because this is based on a true story):

This all happened about a year and several months ago; the girl involved was a minor at the time, but now is not.

Where do I fit in? I don’t- I’m a friend of the friend in the story. I don’t even know who “Jane” or “John” are, as the friend didn’t tell me who the people involved were.

Something else: from the crime, Jane got pregnant, and was contemplating abortion.

I pleaded with the friend to go to the police, to convince her friend to choose life, but I don’t know what happened next. I ended up drifting out of contact with the friend a month or two later and haven’t really spoken to her since. I’m assuming the worst case scenario happened though, given that if the girl went through with the pregnancy and accused the boy of rape it would have been the talk of the town (it’s a small community)

I feel guilty for this sometimes, and I question what more I could have done, but not knowing the identities of those involved, I feel like there wasn’t much I could do. Still, it’s something that can keep one up at night.
 
TantumDicVerbo-

I’m really sorry to hear about your situation. I’m not sure what else you could do, but your friend in this case was probably morally and possibly (depending on state law) legally required to say something to someone about it. I can understand her reluctance to report it to the police or anything, but certainly if John is not a family member, the girl’s parents should have been told? This man can now commit this crime again with other girls, feeling he has “go away with it.” I don’t think rapists (statutory or otherwise) generally stop at one victim.

But I don’t see how you could have done anything about it. I don’t think you have cause to feel guilty (although that doesn’t always stop us fro feeling guilty anyway). If Jane’s friend won’t be convinced, she won’t. I’m sure you prayed for them. And while you’re right that it probably ended as tragically as it began, there is a small amount of hope. The girl might have gone away for a while, stayed with relatives, said she was going to school, or something. Probably not, but it is possible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top