From a CSI rerun last night: Husband (H) and Wife (W) work at a demolitions business owned by W’s father (F). W and F both want W to get a divorce from H, but they’re in Nevada, a community property state, and if they divorce, H becomes part-owner of the business, with none of them want. So they come up with a plan.
They pay a mechanic (M) to help them. W steals parts and explosives from the business, making sure H’s fingerprints are on them. She and M set up the bomb in her own car, get out, and hide while it blows up. Their intent is to frame H for attempted murder, so W can divorce him without having to give him part of F’s business.
In the show, like W, I didn’t think there was a crime they could be charged with (and they can be charged - it was implied that M was singing like a canary, since he’s an ex-con, and they can prove he had something to do with the bomb). But the show seemed to think there was. So is there?
Building bombs and setting off explosions in municipalities is usually illegal, I think. Lying to police/authorities during an investigation is also a crime. If she puts in a claim for the vehicle, it’s insurance fraud.
If a criminal charge is filed, the three of them get to add conspiracy.
What, you don’t think that trying to frame someone for a crime will get you in trouble with the law? I’d be shocked if this didn’t qualify as “criminal conspiracy” or something similar.
I guess that 20 years would be the upper limit for a really serious offense. Attempted murder can be punished by anything up to life in prison in many places, although it’s rare to see someone get that steep a sentence. Similarly, a 20-year sentence for criminal conspiracy is probably the sort of thing they’d give to a mafia don.
Although if I was the judge, I would be inclined to stick the father and daughter with the upper end of the sentencing range. It’s not like they were trying to frame him for jaywalking, after all.
This is a nitpick based on the setup… if the business is owned by F, why would it come up in the divorce settlement of H and W? Just because W is F’s daughter, that doesn’t mean that his business is part of the marriage property.
Unless W was already a minority partner… (either from before or during the marriage,) then her share in the business is something that could be divided in two, I agree.
As a hypothetical, in that situation, could she sell her share back to her father for a penny before divorce proceedings started, and trust that he’d sell it back to her afterward, or would that be some heinous crime? (I can certainly see how the divorce court would take a dim view of it.)