Thu Aug 11 18:42:03 EDT 2005
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Faneuf" <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2005 12:15 PM
Subject: My hypothetical
> My hypothetical assumes that the reporter uncovered information about lax
> security that could have prevented a catastrophic event but that the
> hypothetical news outlet decided to delay broadcast until sweeps which
> occur AFTER said catastrophic event occurs.
> Criminal charges? I suppose I (not being an attorney) would look through
> the statues regarding accessory before the fact.
> Civil suits? I would think that other occupants of the building might
> have grounds to bring a suit against the hypothetical news outlet for
> squashing the story and the FBI for allowing the conditions to occur.
> (maybe even find out what beer they drink and sue them too! LOL)
Neither a person or a news organization has a legal duty to report.
If I heard Person A say that he was going to kill Person B, I have no duty
to tell anyone what I know, even if I believe it. (Some professionals are
mandatory reporters under statutes, but they are the exceptions to the
For me to have criminal liability as an accessory, I would have to do
something to help or encourage Person A before the killing or I would have
to help cover up the crime or help Person A escape or get away.
More information about the Boston-Radio-Interest