Intimidating a witness rcw
If the crime charged is intimidating a public servant, do not use the bracketed term “juror.” See the Comment below. Do not use this instruction if the crime charged is intimidating a witness. Do not use this instruction to define a peace officer, which is separately defined in WPIC 2.16 (Peace Officer—Definition). The statute makes it clear that this definition is not applicable if a public servant appears as a witness and that a witness does not become a public servant merely by testifying. A “public servant” under RCW 9A.04.110(23) includes a person who has failed to complete a technical requirement for his or her position but who properly holds the position de facto. A violation of division (A) of this section is a misdemeanor of the first degree.A violation of division (B) of this section is a felony of the third degree.In England and Wales, witness intimidation by unlawful means, such as violence, bribery, threats, or improper pressure, is known as Perverting the course of justice.Section 51 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 A current source of controversy is the lack of penalties for prosecutors who commit witness tampering or other forms of prosecutorial misconduct.Public servant means any person who presently occupies the position of or has been elected, appointed, or designated to become [any officer or employee of government], a [legislator] [judge] [judicial officer] [juror], [and] [any person participating as an advisor, consultant, or otherwise in performing a governmental function].
Both crimes are serious felonies which can undermine any defenses to underlying criminal charges.
Portions of this instruction may be used with, or as an alternative to, WPIC 115.52 (Intimidating a Witness—Threat—Definition), in combination with WPIC 115.51 (Intimidating a Witness—Threat to Former Witness—Elements). A speaker need not actually intend to carry out a threat in order for the communication to constitute a threat, as long as the speaker objectively knows that the communication constitutes a threat. Kilburn, 151 Wn.2d 36, 48, 84 P.3d 1215 (2004); see also State v.
A conditional threat to injure property in the future is within this definition.
Hansen, 122 Wn.2d 712, 862 P.2d 117 (1993)); threats to bomb a government building (State v.
Johnston, 156 Wn.2d 355, 127 P.3d 707 (2006)); threats involved in intimidating a judge (State v. 45, 966 P.2d 411 (1998)); and threats involved in intimidating a public servant (State v.