Ask Questions, Get Arrested Violently For It?!? 🤷 📼 🔗 👇

⚠️ Compare element number 5 to the short, then watch the short linked within, then read State v. William Hill and the corrupt intent standard (👇NJ Supreme Court👇) 2C:28-5. Tampering. A person commits an offense if, believing that an official proceeding or investigation is pending or about to be instituted or has been instituted, he knowingly engages in conduct which a reasonable person would believe would cause a witness or informant to: (1) Testify or inform falsely; (2) Withhold any testimony, information, document or thing; (3) Elude legal process summoning him to testify or supply evidence; (4) Absent himself from any proceeding or investigation to which he has been legally summoned; or ❓"(5) Otherwise obstruct, delay, prevent or impede an official proceeding or investigation." New Jersey Revised Statutes Section 2C:28-5 (2024) - Tampering with witnesses and informants; retaliation against them. :: 2024 New Jersey Revised Statutes :: U.S. Codes and Statutes :: U.S. Law :: Justia share.google/E4U8RywWaKNG3Jzm3 State v. Hill :: 2024 :: Supreme Court of New Jersey Decisions :: New Jersey Case Law :: New Jersey Law :: U.S. Law :: Justia share.google/6EOGsLrSLiCkCFwvy State v. William Hill, 2024 NJ Supreme Court: Speech-based charges like witness tampering must pass "corrupt intent" The Court found that the statute may have been unconstitutionally as-applied to Hill's specific conduct. Because the letter was "facially innocuous" and contained no explicit threats, the prosecution needed to prove that Hill intended to corruptly influence the witness. The jury instructions at the initial trial failed to require the jury to find this corrupt intent, leading to a new trial on the witness tampering charge. The Court emphasized the importance of proving criminal intent for speech-based witness tampering, particularly when the words themselves are not overtly threatening. This clarification helps safeguard legitimate, non-threatening communications from being improperly prosecuted. State v. Crescenzi, 224 N.J. Super. 142 (App. Div. 1988), is a significant New Jersey case that defined the scope of the witness tampering statute (N.J.S.A. 2C:28-5). Summary of the Ruling The Appellate Division ruled that an individual's simple denial of guilt to a potential witness, or a general plea to "be honest" during an investigation, does not constitute the crime of witness tampering. The court found that these actions lack the requisite criminal intent to cause a witness to testify falsely, withhold evidence, or elude legal process. 📼 The Report.👇    • ✔️Description) 🤷 Neighbor Files Report 🤯 S...… 📼 The SWAT    • 🚨 WHEN YOU ASK A NEIGHBOR PEACEFUL QUESTIO...… 🛑 Are we really this soft as a nation to do that? Furthermore, he's Not even a witness of any crime whatsoever. If you are a NJ civil rights attorney, please reach out. #Firstamendment #policeactivity #cops #livepd #legal #lawenforcement #law #lawyer #youtubeshorts #shorts #attorney