# My friend confesses committing a crime to me. What are my legal obligations? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 13, 2004, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-friend-confesses-committing-a-crime-to-me-what-are-my-legal-obligations/274528 "2004-11-13T04:22:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 8:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-friend-confesses-committing-a-crime-to-me-what-are-my-legal-obligations/274528/21 "2004-11-14T08:08:46Z")
> [@](#): > > To go for another hypothetical: What would happen if the defense council WAS to voluntarily divulge privileged information? Would it be admissible, or would the only serious result be possible action by the Bar? It would not be admissible due to the attorney-client privilege. The attorney cannot waive the privilege; it belongs to the client. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-friend-confesses-committing-a-crime-to-me-what-are-my-legal-obligations/274528/22 "2004-11-14T12:22:25Z")
I must complain to the OP. I had a bad night because of him. Tonight, I’ve been private to a former girlfriend’s plans to have two bombs exploding aboard planes in mid-air. Worst, she managed to involve and compromise me, it was not possible anymore to cancel the action, and I had a hard time with the police. Fortunately, I woke up before before things could go completely out of hand, but still… :mad: :mad: :mad: ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 12:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-friend-confesses-committing-a-crime-to-me-what-are-my-legal-obligations/274528/23 "2004-11-14T12:36:51Z")
> [@clairobscur](#): > > I must complain to the OP. I had a bad night because of him. Tonight, I’ve been private to a former girlfriend’s plans to have two bombs exploding aboard planes in mid-air. Worst, she managed to involve and compromise me, it was not possible anymore to cancel the action, and I had a hard time with the police. Fortunately, I woke up before before things could go completely out of hand, but still… :mad: :mad: :mad: I am very sorry. I haven’t thought much about it, but it must be very tough to maintain a friendship with a Terrorist or Master Criminal. I mean, besides the confessions and the ethical dilemnas that follow, there’s a laundry list of problems. Fleeing without leaving a forwarding address, late night calls for bail money, the linen they ruin while recovering from their wounds in the spare bedroom, not to mention all thr bandages. My God, the bandages they go through! You can draw a line and refuse to buy C4 for their next bomb, but down deep you just know that buying them bandages is _enabling_ them to buy their own C4. ---
**Author:** ![ouryL](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ouryl/32/6067_2.png) [@ouryL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ouryL)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2004, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-friend-confesses-committing-a-crime-to-me-what-are-my-legal-obligations/274528/24 "2004-11-14T20:47:36Z")
> [@KP](#): > > I’m curious about one issue. > > As I understand the hypothetical, the OP has no direct knowledge or evidence of the crime. They only have hearsay which would be presumptively inadmissable at trial. True, there are exceptions to the hearsay rule, but often nobody -not the police, defense lawyer or competent counsel, DA- nobody but the judge at the trial, if there is one, can state with absolute certainty that a certain exception will or will not apply. That is _intended_ to be a finding for a judge to make, albeit within law and precedent. > > So, to what extent can a citizen be obligated to provide information which would be presumptively inadmissable anyway? Are there any general limitations on the protection (if any) afforded by a good faith assumption, by a third party who hears hearsay, that their observations are material enough to require/mandate disclosure? And, of course, as a person uninvolved in the crime itself, the OP may not have the same rights to defer the interview until legal counsel is available, may reasonably not foresee the need for counsel, and almost certainly wouldn’t know, or be expected to know, where the line was. > > A comprehensive answer is probably impossible, but I there may be interesting specific situations to discuss. (e.g. foreseeable imminent harm to others) But suppose the confession to his friend was prompted by witnessing a red stain on his shirt or if his friend also showed him a bloody knife or the victims wallet… ---
**Author:** ![Dag\_Otto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@Dag\_Otto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dag_Otto)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2004, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-friend-confesses-committing-a-crime-to-me-what-are-my-legal-obligations/274528/25 "2004-11-15T17:48:09Z")
> [@KP](#): > > I’m curious about one issue. > > As I understand the hypothetical, the OP has no direct knowledge or evidence of the crime. They only have hearsay which would be presumptively inadmissable at trial. > > So, to what extent can a citizen be obligated to provide information which would be presumptively inadmissable anyway? I’m sure that the confession wouldn’t be brought up in trial for the reasons you mention, but the information from the confession would certainly be used during the investigation. **Boyo Jim** can tell the police what he knows, and the police can investigate further and find other evidence against the friend. It wouldn’t be Jesse James’ confession to Boyo Jim that he robbed the railroad payroll that puts him in jail, but the fact that the sheriff went to Jesse’s house after being tipped off by Boyo Jim and found Jesse counting the money there. ---
**Author:** ![ouryL](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ouryl/32/6067_2.png) [@ouryL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ouryL)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2004, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-friend-confesses-committing-a-crime-to-me-what-are-my-legal-obligations/274528/26 "2004-11-15T19:41:10Z")
> [@KP](#): > > I’m curious about one issue. > > As I understand the hypothetical, the OP has no direct knowledge or evidence of the crime. They only have hearsay which would be presumptively inadmissable at trial. True, there are exceptions to the hearsay rule, but often nobody -not the police, defense lawyer or competent counsel, DA- nobody but the judge at the trial, if there is one, can state with absolute certainty that a certain exception will or will not apply. That is _intended_ to be a finding for a judge to make, albeit within law and precedent. > > So, to what extent can a citizen be obligated to provide information which would be presumptively inadmissable anyway? Are there any general limitations on the protection (if any) afforded by a good faith assumption, by a third party who hears hearsay, that their observations are material enough to require/mandate disclosure? And, of course, as a person uninvolved in the crime itself, the OP may not have the same rights to defer the interview until legal counsel is available, may reasonably not foresee the need for counsel, and almost certainly wouldn’t know, or be expected to know, where the line was. > > A comprehensive answer is probably impossible, but I there may be interesting specific situations to discuss. (e.g. foreseeable imminent harm to others) Quoting a friend of a friend is hearsay and gossip. Hearing it from the friend directly is not. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2004, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-friend-confesses-committing-a-crime-to-me-what-are-my-legal-obligations/274528/27 "2004-11-15T19:44:32Z")
**Dag Otto** : I explained above that an admission is an exception to the hearsay rule. > [@Dag otto](#): > > I’m sure that the confession wouldn’t be brought up in trial for the reasons you mention… No. Actually, it can. Jim tells Bob: “I hope you don’t think less of me as a friend, but last night I robbed a 7-11 and shot the clerk in the head.” At Jim’s trial, Bob can testify that Jim admitted robbing the store and shooting the clerk. Or, more precisely, Bob can testify, for the purpose of proving that Jim robbed the store and shot the clerk, that Jim admitted to Bob that he robbed the store and shot the clerk. Why? Well, let’s start with the definition. “Hearsay.” Hearsay is an out-of-court statement, offered into evidence to prove the matter asserted in the statement. Hearsay is generally inadmissible. But there are some exceptions. One relatively well-known exception is the admission against interest rule. If the out-of-court statement is such that it exposes the declarent (the person making the statement) to penal or pecuniary liability, then it’s admissible. That’s the case in this hypothetical. ---
**Author:** ![ouryL](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ouryl/32/6067_2.png) [@ouryL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ouryL)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2004, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-friend-confesses-committing-a-crime-to-me-what-are-my-legal-obligations/274528/28 "2004-11-15T19:44:42Z")
> [@Jodi](#): > > It would not be admissible due to the attorney-client privilege. The attorney cannot waive the privilege; it belongs to the client. If the client tells his attorney, “I didn’t kill nobody” but then shows him where the bodies are hidden…he becomes accessory after the fact. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2004, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-friend-confesses-committing-a-crime-to-me-what-are-my-legal-obligations/274528/29 "2004-11-15T19:46:56Z")
> [@ouryL](#): > > Quoting a friend of a friend is hearsay and gossip. > Hearing it from the friend directly is not. Grrrr. In the law, you’ve described what’s known as “totem pole” hearsay, or “hearsay within hearsay.” As long as each individual “step” on the totem pole is admissible, the totem pole is admissible. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2004, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-friend-confesses-committing-a-crime-to-me-what-are-my-legal-obligations/274528/30 "2004-11-15T19:50:07Z")
> [@ouryL](#): > > If the client tells his attorney, “I didn’t kill nobody” but then shows him where the bodies are hidden…he becomes accessory after the fact. The attorney becomes an accessory after the fact? Under what theory? ---
**Author:** ![KP](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/a9adbd/32.png) [@KP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KP)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2004, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-friend-confesses-committing-a-crime-to-me-what-are-my-legal-obligations/274528/31 "2004-11-15T20:06:26Z")
That’s a useful piece of information for a citizen to have, **Bricker**. We may not be planning to commit any crimes, but we’ve all seen people brag about illegal acts (even falsely, IMHO) that they deem “manly” or otherwise perversely desirable. It’d be sad for them if it were repeated in court and believed. The take home message, which I’m sure you’ve given many times, is “keep your big fat trap shut” (and possibly “stay our of bars”) I wonder if I could trouble you for some clarification. In the modern world, “Pecuniary liability” is a pretty broad brush. It often seems there is little that might not open one up to (civil) pecuniary liability. Does “penal interest” cover any unlawful act (e.g. parking illegally, burning trash without a permit, etc.) Are you simplifying for our benefit, or is the exemption actually that broad in practice? I suppose I should actually be asking the opposite question: Given that exemption, how often does the rule against hearsay actually end up being important in criminal proceedings? ---
**Author:** ![KP](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/a9adbd/32.png) [@KP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KP)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2004, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-friend-confesses-committing-a-crime-to-me-what-are-my-legal-obligations/274528/32 "2004-11-15T20:16:17Z")
> [@](#): > > Bricker said: > > “At Jim’s trial, Bob can testify that Jim admitted robbing the store and shooting the clerk. Or, _ **more precisely** _, Bob can testify,_[\*\* for the purpose of proving that Jim robbed the store and shot the clerk_\*\*, that Jim admitted to Bob that he robbed the store and shot the clerk.” _[Emphasis mine_ Did I parse that correctly, to indicate that in another case the same or similar hearsay evidence might be admissible for other purpose, such as to impeach Jim’s credibility or character, even if it were not admissible (for some reason) as evidence that Jim did indeed perform the nefarious deeds in question? I try to read you carefully, because people who know what they’re talking about are rare treasures in discussions like these. I don’t want to bug you about details until you swear of our hypotheticals forever, but I also don’t want to read more into your remarks than you intended. ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2004, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-friend-confesses-committing-a-crime-to-me-what-are-my-legal-obligations/274528/33 "2004-11-16T00:06:48Z")
> [@KP](#): > > Did I parse that correctly, to indicate that in another case the same or similar hearsay evidence might be admissible for other purpose, such as to impeach Jim’s credibility or character, even if it were not admissible (for some reason) as evidence that Jim did indeed perform the nefarious deeds in question? > > I try to read you carefully, because people who know what they’re talking about are rare treasures in discussions like these. I don’t want to bug you about details until you swear of our hypotheticals forever, but I also don’t want to read more into your remarks than you intended. Out of court statements can either be inadmissable hearsay, hearsay that is admissible because it’s subject to a hearsay exception or exclusion, or not hearsay at all. I think what **Bricker** is saying is that a statement is only hearsay if it’s being used to prove the truth of the matter asserted; for other purposes, the same statement may not even be hearsay. Jim’s statement is hearsay if you’re using it to prove the matter asserted, namely, that Jim did in fact rob and kill the 7-11 clerk (although it is admissible under hearsay exceptions). However, if you’re using it to prove the fact that Jim was capable of speech, it’s not hearsay. My statement of “Jim just shot me!” would be hearsay if being used to prove that jim shot me, but is probably subject to a hearsay exception of present sense impression or excited utterance. The same statement is defined in the Federal Rules of Evidence as not being hearsay if it’s being used to rebut a charge of recent fabrication–the fact that I made a “prior consistent statement” that backs up my testimony at trial makes it not hearsay by definition if the other side argues that I made my story up recently. If it’s being used just to prove that I was capable of talking even though I’d been shot, it’s not hearsay under any definition. My favorite illustration is the one about the guy who calls a woman’s house and hears a man answer the phone “party headquarters!” This is how Ted always answers the phone. In court, you could use this to prove that it was Ted answering the phone. If you attempted to use the statment to prove that the place actually was “party headquarters,” however, it would be hearsay. 😃 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-friend-confesses-committing-a-crime-to-me-what-are-my-legal-obligations/274528.md?page=1)