President Trump made headlines yet again for a tweet. Despite how common that sentence is nowadays, this particular tweet made headlines due to its criminal law implications. My good friend and colleague Nick Verderame (https://plattner-verderame.com/attorneys/nick-verderame/) asked me if the President committed a crime. What did President Trump say? See for yourself:
Yes, that’s President Trump implying there may be recordings of conversations he had with the Former FBI Director. You know, the one President Trump recently fired. The reasons behind said firing are not pertinent to whether a crime occurred, so I won’t discuss them.
To determine whether that tweet could lead to criminal charges we need to examine 18 U.S. Code § 1512. This section of the Federal Code deals with “Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant.” There are a few different ways to violate this section, and I will only look at the ones that apply (President Trump hasn’t killed anyone, so it doesn’t make sense to discuss that subsection).
First, anyone who knowingly uses intimidation, threatens, or corruptly persuades another person, or attempts to do so, or engages in misleading conduct toward another person, with intent to influence, delay, or prevent the testimony of any person in an official proceeding has committed the crime. If convicted, President Trump could a receive a fine, be imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both. It definitely seems like President Trump has run afoul of this section. At the very least, his tweet appears to be an attempt to prevent former Director Comey from testifying. I see two issues with that: 1) It’s going to be hard to prove that it was actually the President who sent that tweet. Yes, I know that sounds absurd given who he is, but it’s still on the Government to prove it. 2) The President has an affirmative defense. If he can prove by a preponderance of the evidence, that the conduct consisted solely of lawful conduct and that his sole intention was to encourage, induce, or cause the other person to testify truthfully then no crime occurred. This is probably his strongest argument. There is nothing illegal about sending out a tweet. Further, one can argue that his tweet was simply meant to encourage Director Comey to tell the truth, because if he lies, there are “tapes” to contradict him.
Second, causing or inducing a person to withhold testimony, or withhold a record, document, or other object, from an official proceeding is also a violation of the law. The same possible sentence as above applies. Does the President’s tweet meet the criteria? It would seem so at first glance, however, the crime itself is not complete. Former Director Comey, as of this writing, has not refused to testify before Congress. Most reports indicate he is not only willing to testify but will only do so in public.
Finally, whoever intentionally harasses another person and thereby hinders, delays, prevents, or dissuades any person from attending or testifying in an official proceeding or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 3 years, or both. This subsection carries a less onerous penalty, but it is still a crime. I think the Government runs into the same issues as above. Namely, can it prove it was actually the President who sent that tweet, and can the President show his only intention was to encourage Director Comey to tell the truth.
Given the issues, this is not a good case for the Government to bring. This is also an example of how smart individuals can be quick to condemn something as criminal without understanding the nuance of the law. This is why it is always important to discuss legal issues with a qualified attorney. If you are accused of or charged with intimidating or tampering with a witness, you should consult an attorney immediately. The Nava Law Firm offers free consultations, and we are available to take your call 24/7.
Woman was charged with her second DUI within 7 years after being involved in a collision in Scottsdale. Through our investigation, we found multiple mistakes made by the arresting officer. These errors were used to get the prosecution to reduce the alleged offense to a charge with no jail time.
A black man was pulled over by Salt River Police Department while visiting from out of town. Despite showing no signs of impairment, the officers arrested him and charged him with DUI Drugs. We investigated the case heavily and interviewed every officer involved. Ultimately, a motion to suppress was filed and granted after an evidentiary hearing before a Judge.
A man was charged with attacking a family with a knife. After reviewing the evidence, it was determined that the instrument used was not a knife at all. The Grand Jury had been misled, so we filed a motion challenging the grand jury presentation. The prosecutor, confronted with the truth, agreed to reduce the charge to a misdemeanor with no jail time.
Woman was charged with her second DUI within 7 years after being involved in a collision in Scottsdale. Through our investigation, we found multiple mistakes made by the arresting officer. These errors were used to get the prosecution to reduce the alleged offense to a charge with no jail time.
A man was out on a walk and was stopped by police because he was in the area of an attempted vehicle theft. The man maintained his innocence, but the owner of the truck identified him as the man he saw attempt to steal it. We worked tirelessly to prepare a defense and get the prosecution to see reason. The State wouldn’t budge, so the case went to trial. After a 4 day trial, the jury took approximately 10 minutes to return a Not Guilty verdict.
Woman was charged with her second DUI within 7 years after being involved in a collision in Scottsdale. Through our investigation, we found multiple mistakes made by the arresting officer. These errors were used to get the prosecution to reduce the alleged offense to a charge with no jail time.
A client was charged with resist arrest after being targeted by police during the protests of Summer 2020. Our firm developed a strategy with activists and members of the media that led to a dismissal of our client’s case and, eventually, all cases connected to the political prosecution of the protesters.
Woman was charged with her second DUI within 7 years after being involved in a collision in Scottsdale. Through our investigation, we found multiple mistakes made by the arresting officer. These errors were used to get the prosecution to reduce the alleged offense to a charge with no jail time.
A woman and her boyfriend were arguing over the cleaning of their apartment. The police were called after things escalated and the woman was arrested. The Mesa City Prosecutors originally wanted the woman to do jail time. After working the case and providing background information, we were able to get the prosecutor to allow the woman to complete classes in exchange for a dismissal.
Woman was charged with her second DUI within 7 years after being involved in a collision in Scottsdale. Through our investigation, we found multiple mistakes made by the arresting officer. These errors were used to get the prosecution to reduce the alleged offense to a charge with no jail time.
We have experience managing violent cases that fall under the categories of murder and manslaughter. Out of respect for all Nava Law Firm clients that fall under this case type, we are not providing any information on our website. If you or a loved one have been charged with one of these serious charges, do not speak to police officers and please contact our firm immediately to get a free consultation.
Woman was charged with her second DUI within 7 years after being involved in a collision in Scottsdale. Through our investigation, we found multiple mistakes made by the arresting officer. These errors were used to get the prosecution to reduce the alleged offense to a charge with no jail time.
