What is Considered Legal Intimidation?
In cases of legal intimidation, the offending acts are usually perpetrated by people who are both powerful and callous, using their power to get what they want. For example, if a senior manager, who is indispensable to a company’s smooth running, is bullied into complying with an unreasonable request, there may be scope for legal proceedings. The manager may have been threatened with disciplinary action, redundancy or even actual physical harm. By the same token, if a husband blackmails his wife into signing a favourable pre-nuptial agreement before they marry, he may be guilty of legal intimidation. Intimidation can be difficult to prove as there is no specific act that constitutes treatment of this sort . However, here are some behaviors that generally feature in instances of legal intimidation: Threats of violence or physical harm, Threats of imprisonment or legal penalties, Threats of criminal prosecution, Threats of financial difficulties or bankruptcy, Threats to withhold valuable items or funds, Threats to report to the relevant authorities, for example, Social Services or the police, Threats to discredit or damage a person’s reputation, Threats to disrupt a person’s life, marriage or family. Some High Court judges have warned other members of the judiciary not to allow themselves to be bullied by the threat of legal action. Certain judges have also held a plaintiff guilty of abusing the legal process in order to intimidate a defendant, although the plaintiff in that case had to be proven to have specifically misused the judicial process in this manner.
Legal Intimidation Penalties
Any person found guilty of intimidating a participant may face one or more of the following penalties:
- jail time;
- fines;
- suspension of professional licenses; and
- bars from government employment.
The range of penalties is wide because of the blurring of the line between informal witness tampering and attempted murder. If an accused attempts to kill a witness, the state may bring murder charges against him. In a recent case, a man was sentenced to 20 years in prison for conspiring and attempting to intimidate, as well as murder, his ex-girlfriend – a witness against him. A more common sentence for witnesses tampering or intimidation is a fine and several years in jail.
Public officials found guilty of witness tampering can have their employment terminated, and should expect further sanctions from the state. A court does not take lightly to public officials abusing their official position, because it almost always involves abusing the trust of the people.
Common Forms of Intimidation within the Courtroom
In the arena of legal proceedings, intimidation can rear its head in various forms. One common method is through direct threats. For example, a litigant may threaten an opponent’s family to elicit information or coerce them into dropping a case. Coercion, too, is a prevalent form of intimidation. It can involve subtle suggestions or implications that a party will face negative consequences if they do not act in a certain way. (The threat may also be more indirect: "It would be a shame if something were to happen" in case xxx). A more insidious form of intimidation is harassment. This category refers to repeated, unwelcome behavior targeting an individual with the intent to disturb or impede their legal rights or actions. Harassment may take the form of stalking, filing frivolous lawsuits, or making repeated, harassing phone calls to a person’s home.
For instance, in an employment discrimination case, a manager may repeatedly email or call a former employee (who is now a witness) in order to undermine his/her credibility or to persuade him/her to recant previous testimony. There are numerous instances of non-parties – such as jurors, witnesses, and others – facing intimidation attempts. In re Top Urgent Care Center, Inc., involved the attempt by a creditor to intimidate a creditor’s committee’s advisor by threatening that advisor that he had better reach a deal or else his children would be harmed. While Maryland does not specifically include coercion, threats, or other forms of intimidation, these may fall under the general ban on attempts to "interfere with the process."
Measures to Protect Involved Parties from Intimidation
Among the most important concerns of all participants in the legal process is the protection of witnesses against intimidation. The existence of a witness intimidation problem is obvious from the very fact that it exists as an offense in California and elsewhere. The threat of harassing, stalking, threatening and, in the worst cases assaulting and killing witnesses tends to create a chilling effect upon the willingness of individuals to testify in a court of law.
Fortunately, numerous measures exist for protecting not only witnesses, but jurors and others from whom key information is solicited in the context of other legal proceedings. Most of these mechanisms are described in detail in separate discussions in the pages of this blog.
It will be sufficient here simply to mention that certain witnesses who have been threatened or assaulted in the past can apply for protective orders. The terms of such protective orders restrict the ability of at least some categories of witnesses to meet with or even to be near the individuals who have threatened them . This can help eliminate the source of intimidation from communities where large numbers of persons are involved and where fear is obviously well founded.
The laws relevant to witness intimidation also tend to include provisions for sequestering jurors. The process of jury selection (voir dire) includes steps to screen out individuals whose judgment is likely to be affected by pretrial publicity, or who are overly concerned about the potential for harm arising from unpopular verdicts. In the event that the existence of jury bias becomes apparent during the trial, an appropriate jury can be selected and sequestered, if necessary.
In addition, jurors and other witnesses have access to the services of law enforcement personnel during trial. Pregnant jurors may be excused from service altogether, and other victims of intimidation may obtain crisis intervention counseling and other assistance from the courts and social services agencies.
Notifying Officials about Intimidation in Court
When intimidation occurs within the realm of legal proceedings, it’s crucial to understand how to effectively report the incident to ensure that proper action is taken. This process starts by recognizing the proper channels through which an incident of intimidation can be reported and the importance of providing detailed information about the mistakes or coercive actions that were made.
In most cases, parties to a legal proceeding should first report intimidation to their attorney. This is because a lawyer and their law firm will have the legal knowledge to help guide the case in the most positive direction, careful not to endanger their client further. They may recommend peaceful avenues of resolution, such as meetings with opposing counsel or additional motions. In some circumstances, however, the intimidation may be too much to resolve through private discussion and mediation.
Your lawyer should provide you with professional guidance on how to proceed. An experienced lawyer will also recognize when the intimidation is serious enough for the authorities to get involved. In these cases, the police may become involved and criminal charges filed against the individual who attempted to intimidate you.
The nature of the claim being pursued by the victim may also require a report to the state’s bar association or a judicial review board, especially if the intimidation aimed at the victim was made by one of the parties’ lawyers. If you believe that this is the case, ask for immediate legal advice from your lawyer. It’s critical they evaluate whether the other side’s lawyers acted outside of the bounds of their role or attempted to infringe on your rights to present your case.
Regardless of the circumstances surrounding the claim, it’s crucial to build and retain underlying documentation that supports the basis of your claim. The documentation should include any letters, emails or other communications that make reference to the intimidation. The key is to provide detailed accounts of what occurred. Details and accuracy will be critical in investigating the claim.
Documentation should start immediately and contain any evidence of previous incidents involving the same lawyer, prosecutor, judge or any other court personnel. This allows the integrity of their behavior in your case to be evaluated holistically. Document as much information as possible, even if it seems trivial at the time. It’s better to have too much evidence than not enough while making the case to law enforcement or the court.
If you or someone you know is involved in a legal proceeding and suspect that they are being intimidated, contact an experienced lawyer who can evaluate the situation and help guide the next steps of the process.
Legal Professional’s Role in Counteracting Intimidation
Lawyers play a critical role in preventing and confronting intimidation, as they are often the first line of defense against such tactics. When an attorney becomes aware of possible intimidation, whether by a party or other outside influence, they have an ethical obligation to notify the court of the potential problem, primarily to ensure the safety of their client. This early intervention is vital so that the court can take steps to neutralize a threat before it can escalate.
After hearing from counsel, the trial court has several options for addressing the situation. If appropriate, the court may issue an ex parte order to all present parties prohibiting the offending individual from contacting, intimidating or threatening the victim. A protective order is also an option if there has been actual harm. The court itself can hold the party in contempt, issue fines, or in extreme cases incarcerate the person guilty of misconduct. When the offending behavior is perpetrated over a longer period of time, the court could impose a permanent injunction or cross-complaint, as well as sanctions and default against the offending party.
Judges are also in a position to prevent and respond to intimidation that might occur during trial. In California , intimidation of witnesses is prohibited by California Penal Code § 137. Many judges use direct admonishments to witnesses to prevent such intimidation. For example, the judge will warn witnesses that they are expected to give truthful testimony regardless of the consequences to their personal lives, and not to discuss the case with other witnesses, including the attorneys, while they are still subject to being called to testify. Most judges will support counsel’s objection to witness intimidation.
Finally, law enforcement also plays a crucial role is protecting witnesses and other individuals who might be subject to intimidation. First and foremost, a police report should be filed immediately after an instance of intimidation occurs. A no-contact order from the police is often advisable. In addition, witnesses should be encouraged to file for any and all civil remedies that might apply.
The most effective means of preventing intimidation is to actively support a "code of civility" among all individuals involved in a case. The code should promote truthful testimony, respect for one another and the process, and an understanding that all parties will abide by the rule of law and court orders. Judges, attorneys and law enforcement should work together to set an example and set the tone.