Witness Relocation

[bernie]

A bud and me were discussing this the other night.

This would be a tough decision.

Say you see a murder by a notorious gang/mob and are offered this in exchange for your testimony. You also have the option of testifying w/o protection or just not testifying.

Given that if you take the deal, life as you know it will cease to exist. You won't see your friends or family again, not to mention you won't be able to do many of the 'outside' things you are accustomed to even in the new place that they move you to.

Would you take the deal?

Pros/cons?

b

[TStoneMBD]

not tough at all. dont testify.

[tbach24]

What's the mob's offer for you not telling? Just that you get to live? I wouldn't tell anyways, but I'd try for some free EV.

[fluxrad]

Tough call, definitely -EV all around.

But our whole system of justice crumbles if no one is willing to testify against these types of crimes. As much as I'd hate the thought of not seeing my family/friends ever again, I think this is the price I pay to live in a civilized society. It's the same as the draft or jury duty...some things you just have to do.

Also, I voted to testify because I don't think you wouldn't be able to do "outside" things in your new life. Assuming they moved you some place new and gave you a new name I don't think the feds are going to prevent you from ever leaving your house or going to a ball game, etc. That just doesn't sound realistic.

EDIT: The other thing you forget is that there's no way the feds move you but don't move your family. Consider that killing your wife/kids is probably an easier method for the Mob to convince you not to testify so the feds would have to move your family too (just maybe not with you).

[[censored]]

I could not make a decision that would not allow me to see my family.

I would want to testify and hope that I would. However I would not put my family in any danger so it would depend on the level of risk.

[J.R.]

[ QUOTE ]
notorious gang/mob

[/ QUOTE ]

they are gonna take your word u won't ever testify against them?

[JaBlue]

Don't they move the whole family in these types of deals?
i wouldn't do it.


on an aside: how come they don't just let you go into the police station and record your testimony there, garble it up so it isn't recognizable, and then present it to the jury with only the judge knowing the identity of the speaker? maybe because of lack of cross-examination but it seems like this is a pretty obvious way for people to present testimonials without getting whacked (???)

[fluxrad]

[ QUOTE ]

on an aside: how come they don't just let you go into the police station and record your testimony there, garble it up so it isn't recognizable, and then present it to the jury with only the judge knowing the identity of the speaker? maybe because of lack of cross-examination but it seems like this is a pretty obvious way for people to present testimonials without getting whacked (???)

[/ QUOTE ]

Amendment VI

[JaBlue]

you will have to go into more detail

[Voltron87]

If you went to the mob and offered to be quiet for $$, they would know who you are, and what you know, and kill you.

[J.R.]

[ QUOTE ]
maybe because of lack of cross-examination

[/ QUOTE ]

[bennyk]

[ QUOTE ]
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Voltron87]

Do you really trust the police that much? That is something which would definitely be abused.

[JaBlue]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks benny.

we need to change that

[JaBlue]

it will be supported by a private meeting with the judge then

[Voltron87]

Depends on the crime, who was killed, and what my situation was like. If they murdered some rival mafia member, I'm not testifying. If the victim is someone innocent, then it is tougher. If I am settled with a family and kids, I wouldn't. If I was single and could move easily, that would be a plus. But most likely I would not testify.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
Depends on the crime, who was killed, If they murdered some rival mafia member

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this.

[bennyk]

it's there to protect the defendant as much as the witness; being able to see the testimony in person allows the jury to make a better, more informed decision.

there have certainly been many cases where videotaped testimony is admitted... i'm not clear on how cross-examination is handled in these cases. i guess it would be treated more like a deposition and not as testimony.

bk

[fluxrad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

thanks benny.

we need to change that

[/ QUOTE ]

You're being sarcastic, right?

[TStoneMBD]

im confused the mob is going to give you something for not testifying?

i was under the impression that the mob didnt know you saw them and that you can just not go to the cops and thats the end of the story.

[Voltron87]

Even if the court could verify what was said, put yourself in the shoes of a defense lawyer. Then you would see why it is unconstitutional. You wouldn't be able to cross examine the witness or look into his background, or be able to challenge his version of events.

[JaBlue]

interesting, bernie. Maybe set up a private meeting with the jury? obviously i would only have this done where the witness's life is on the line... I mean, I'd have to think a hell of a lot of mob cases aren't getting tried because of the witness having to testify openly etc.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
The other thing you forget is that there's no way the feds move you but don't move your family

[/ QUOTE ]

Only immediate family. Not Brothers and sisters. Aunts, Uncles, Nephews, Nieces. And good ol' mom and dad.

b

[Voltron87]

The mob couldn't give you anything, since that would require you to reveal your identity and let them know what you know. And then they would kill you.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
If I am settled with a family and kids, I wouldn't

[/ QUOTE ]

This doesn't necesarily make you any safer.

b

[Sponger15SB]

My life > others lives affected by trial.

I don't testify in a heartbeat.

[Voltron87]

That part wasn't about being safer, it's about how much of my life is being uprooted. If me and my wife have jobs we like, and our kids are in good schools, moving to another state would be a lot harder than if I am single and unattached.

[J.R.]

[ QUOTE ]
Say you see a murder by a notorious gang/mob and are offered this in exchange for your testimony. You also have the option of testifying w/o protection or just not testifying.

[/ QUOTE ]

u already went to the police...the problem doesn't specify the mob knows, so maybe we are supposed to assume they do not... but practically speaking that won't often prove to be a realistic assumption.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
moving to another state would be a lot harder than if I am single and unattached.



[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
My life > others lives affected by trial.

I don't testify in a heartbeat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if the accused know you witnessed it? It's also possible it's not just your life, in your circle of people, that may be at risk.

b

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My life > others lives affected by trial.

I don't testify in a heartbeat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if the accused know you witnessed it?

b

[/ QUOTE ]

You did not specify that in OP, you're changing the rules.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
You did not specify that in OP, you're changing the rules.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not changing it, just presenting a possibility. I added the 'pros/cons' at the bottom of the OP that others have brought up in this regard.

You may not know that the accused know who you are.

Either way, it's a tough decision.

b

[TimM]

[ QUOTE ]
im confused the mob is going to give you something for not testifying?

i was under the impression that the mob didnt know you saw them and that you can just not go to the cops and thats the end of the story.

[/ QUOTE ]

This should be in the original question. If the mob knew, you'd probably have no choice but to testify. If only the cops knew, maybe that information could get leaked. So maybe the scenario should be:

The cops and mob both know there was a witness, but they don't know who it was. The cops make a public offer that if the witness steps forward, they get in the program.

Probably only your immediate family gets in the program. I don't think I would do it. I'd be more worried about my extended family. They would be in the most danger during the trial.

BTW, my sister was best friends with a mob boss' daughter. She was almost like a Meadow Soprano type, before she found out what her father did. The father had a big house and all this money, and no one knew where it came from. Everybody joked that maybe he was in the mafia. Then one day the mother and daughter wound up in witness protection, and he was arrested.

[Girchuck]

I don't think there is a choice. You must take the deal for your own safety. If the police found out that you are a witness, the mob will also find out, and you will be eliminated. If the police didn't find out you are a witness, you have a small chance to escape detection, but if the murder investigators are likely to determine that you were in position to witness the crime, you must take the deal immediately. Even if they just talk to you, it is enough to take the deal. The only reason you shouldn't take the deal, is if the police and the mob both are extremely unlikely to suspect that you are a witness. The chances of that depend on the circumstances.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
This should be in the original question. If the mob knew, you'd probably have no choice but to testify. If only the cops knew, maybe that information could get leaked. So maybe the scenario should be:


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree I should've been more specific in the OP. Especially in regards to the poll.

However, my first concern was thoughts on WL in general as far as general thoughts if some would take it.

b

[Dynasty]

[ QUOTE ]
You won't see your friends or family again

[/ QUOTE ]

You will be able to see family (parents, uncles/aunts, cousins). The program won't prevent this and should help with doing it safely.

It's only criminals who are given immunity/lesser sentances in exchange for testifying that get the screwjob treatment in witness protection.

A normal citizen isn't going to be treated so poorly.

[Blarg]

You will probably take a big step down in terms of living standards, though. They need to put you someplace safe, not someplace good. And they don't have to find you a job with your same salary/benefits and whatever. To go from a nice job to starting your career over again is a gigantic blow some people wouldn't recover from; it would be negating all the progress you might have made in 20 or more years of your working life. Which is the way men, in particular define themselves.

If you were flipping burgers or something, though, who cares? How much worse could your jobs really get?

[Sponger15SB]

If I had to be relocated I'd just get this guy to do it for me....

http://www.fullmoonsales.com/ProductImages/dvd_images/big_eraser.jpg

[fluxrad]

Damn you guys are a self-centered bunch.

What about the next 20 people the guy has whacked because he's not behind bars? Don't any of you give a crap about those people?

As an extended version of this question: How many people's lives would have to be saved down the road in order for you to risk testifying? 10? 20? 40?

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
It's only criminals who are given immunity/lesser sentances in exchange for testifying that get the screwjob treatment in witness protection

[/ QUOTE ]

Not necesarily.

From MSNBC article (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7184047/)

[ QUOTE ]
After the witness gets established, contact with the government is required only once a year unless there is some change, such as a new address. But there are a host of rules, foremost among them a ban on contact with outside family, friends or associates

[/ QUOTE ]

b