AZlawyer
Verified Attorney
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2008
- Messages
- 7,883
- Reaction score
- 2,123
AmazonRain, morally ITA, support your outrage and everyone else who feels the same way. I hate being the bearer of bad news, but IMO it is important to point out the FL statute exempts AW from being charged as an accessory after the fact. I'm only continuing this discussion because 1. I think the statute is relevant, 2. statutory exemption may explain why LE has not charged, and (most importantly) 3. I want to provide the legal context for my opinion.
Immunity provision of Fla. Statute § 777.03:
"Accessory after the fact Whoever, not standing in the relation of husband or wife, parent or grandparent, child or grandchild, brother or sister, by consanguinity or affinity to the offender, maintains or assists the principal or accessory before the fact, or gives the offender any other aid, knowing that he has committed a felony or been accessory thereto before the fact, with intent that he shall avoid or escape detection, arrest, trial or punishment, shall be deemed an accessory after the fact, and be punished by imprisonment in the state prison not exceeding seven years, or in the county jail not exceeding one year, or by fine not exceeding one thousand dollars."
"with intent that he shall avoid or escape detection, arrest, trial or punishment" IMO even if AW wasn't married to CWW and thus exempted under the FL statute, a prosecutor wouldn't charge where the facts show AW cooperated with LE without counsel (no legal obligation to speak with LE) and despite denying knowledge (not a crime), she did not give false statements to LE. Also, CWW told Tshomaker to get a restraining order against LE. I'm assuming he said something similar to his wife, but AW still voluntarily spoke with LE.
More FL specific legalese:
"[under the peculiar wording of the Florida Statute] to charge one as an accessory after the fact, it is incumbent upon the State to establish by its evidence that the defendant is not within the prohibited relationship outlined in the Statute" https://casetext.com/case/brooks-v-state-228
"In upholding Floridas statute against an equal protection challenge, a Florida appeals court emphasized societys interest in safeguarding the family unit from unnecessary fractional pressures and applauded the legislatures decision to confer[] immunity so that these individuals need never choose between love of family and obedience to the law.:scared:
https://books.google.com/books?id=T... after the fact murder florida spouse&f=false
MO may have different rules, and I don't know if those rules would apply because AW was in MO, or rather the FL statute applies because the act occurred in FL...but my brain hurts. AZLawyer, your wisdom would be greatly appreciated.lease:
LASTLY (I promise) I sincerely apologize if this post is way too much detail, and I've wasted anyone's time.
I think Florida law would clearly apply, since she lied to Florida LE about a Florida murder. But I agree that the accessory after the fact statute is not applicable to her. Now, what about the statute Casey Anthony was convicted under--for lying to LE? That one doesn't seem to have a spousal exemption.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0800-0899/0837/0837.html