The court may also evaluate the extent to which the confidential informant was involved with the crime. If the CI directly witnessed or participated in the criminal activity, then ordinarily the court will order disclosure. But if there is evidence of the crime from a source other than the CI, the court may decide to keep the informer's identity secret. For example, say the police arrest Joe for embezzlement based on the information provided by a confidential informant, his accountant Ricky.
Joe learns from the prosecution that the unnamed CI was involved in the embezzlement and is the main source of evidence for the prosecution. Joe argues that he needs to know the CI's identity. He claims that the documentation the CI provided the police is false, and that he needs the CI's identity in order to prove how it was falsified. Given that Ricky's information is material to the case against Joe, and that the basis for it is an essential part of Joe's defense, a court might grant a motion to disclose the CI's identity.
But if Ricky was only one piece of the evidence against Joe, and the prosecution had other, independent evidence of Joe's criminal activities, then the court might decide it's not necessary to reveal Ricky's identity to Joe and his attorneys. The prosecution and police typically don't have to reveal the identity of an informant if they don't have it.
So if they get an anonymous phone call detailing some of Joe's shady business activities and use this information as a lead to uncover Joe's dealings, Joe would be out of luck at trial in discovering the identity of the person who ratted him out. The police are generally not required to conduct investigation to uncover the confidential informant's identity if it's unknown to them. There are two opportunities to find out the identity of a confidential informant: before and during trial.
If a defendant doesn't ask for disclosure of the identity at one of these two times, then the issue is waived meaning that the defendant can't find out the identity later. It can be an uphill battle to learn the identity of a confidential informant, but discovering it can also be crucial to a defendant's ability to mount an adequate defense. In addition, if a court orders disclosure and a witness refuses to name the confidential informant, then the court may strike the testimony of that witness or dismiss the case, so it's worth the effort to try and find out who the confidential informant is.
The information provided on this site is not legal advice, does not constitute a lawyer referral service, and no attorney-client or confidential relationship is or will be formed by use of the site. The attorney listings on this site are paid attorney advertising. In some states, the information on this website may be considered a lawyer referral service.
Please reference the Terms of Use and the Supplemental Terms for specific information related to your state. Grow Your Legal Practice. Meet the Editors. Learning the Identity of a Confidential Informant. The prosecution can't always keep the identity of an informant secret; a defendant who makes a good enough showing is entitled to it. Drawing from interviews with 20 active street offenders, we explore the social meaning and consequences of snitching the exchange of incriminating information for reward or leniency.
The snitch violates the code of the street and is universally despised by street criminals. Although few of our respondents reported that they had or would provide information to the police, the interviews indicate that snitching is rampant. We found that some forms of snitching are more acceptable than others, and that most offenders resist the identity of the snitch even when they perform the role. We also found evidence that police practices may contribute to the retaliatory violence associated with snitching.
We conclude that expanded legal access for street criminals may reduce reliance on informers and help contain the spread of violence. It publishes work of the highest quality from around the world and across all areas of criminology. BJC is a valuable resource for academics and researchers in crime, whether they be from criminology, sociology, anthropology, psychology, law, economics, politics or social work, and for professionals concerned with crime, law, criminal justice, politics, and penology.
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. They are a part of the justice system few cops want to talk about. The system, she added, is designed to make it so. Revealing identities could end lives and wreck investigations. How much leniency? How much cash? More in News.
0コメント