Celebrating 10 years! 2007-2017

42 USC §1983 - Threatening False Charges of Witness Tampering

Assume the following: Man accused of domestic violence ag jeffm11/19/18
In short, "If you don't plead, we'll throw your momma in jai jeffm11/19/18
If you have evidence of a custom or practice sue the municip jmoney11/20/18
investigating someone is generally not a violation unless it jorgedeclaro11/20/18
At this point no. Granny should tell the police to bugger of fettywap11/20/18
No. And grandma ran a big risk too. She's fortunate not to g porochi11/20/18
jeffm (Nov 19, 2018 - 7:42 pm)

Assume the following:

Man accused of domestic violence against child. Grandma (man's mom) videos a session where she questions the child, and the child admits to making up the story.

Police not happy with the video. They want to talk to grandma about "witness tampering."

Grandma did not offer any benefit or engage in any coercion of child. Just assume this for this thread's purposes.

Is there a case on point to support 42 USC §1983 charges against the state players in this fiasco?

Here's the real deal: Police don't like criminal defense attorneys getting access to witnesses (for obvious reasons). This is the game they play to discourage it.

Reply
jeffm (Nov 19, 2018 - 8:02 pm)

In short, "If you don't plead, we'll throw your momma in jail."

Reply
jmoney (Nov 20, 2018 - 7:47 pm)

If you have evidence of a custom or practice sue the municipality under Monell (if the underlying act is in fact a const viol)

Reply
jorgedeclaro (Nov 20, 2018 - 12:15 am)

investigating someone is generally not a violation unless it’s a pretext for a person’s protected activity. Wanting to talk voluntarily is generally a part of the community caretaking exception and is not a search or seizure.

Maybe a 6th Amendment confrontation clause argument (but I doubt grandma has standing to assert and I doubt the right attaches before trial).

Your best argument is that it violates 5th/14th Amendment right to procedural due process.

Qualified immunity is always the devil when it comes to unique 1983 arguments so find you’re precedent.

Reply
fettywap (Nov 20, 2018 - 7:12 pm)

At this point no. Granny should tell the police to bugger off and not talk to them.

Reply
porochi (Nov 20, 2018 - 8:45 pm)

No. And grandma ran a big risk too. She's fortunate not to get prosecuted. She should not talk to LEO's about this. Not a chance in hell that she has a viable 1983 claim. I represented govt. defendants in numerous 1983 actions. I know the drill.

Reply
Post a message in this thread