WFTV - STRICKLAND filed complaint against Baez!

[Chezhire]

Here's another one that makes it a misdemeanor.

406.12 Duty to report; prohibited acts.--It is the duty of any person in the district where a death occurs, including all municipalities and unincorporated and federal areas, who becomes aware of the death of any person occurring under the circumstances described in s. 406.11 to report such death and circumstances forthwith to the district medical examiner. Any person who knowingly fails or refuses to report such death and circumstances, who refuses to make available prior medical or other information pertinent to the death investigation, or who, without an order from the office of the district medical examiner, willfully touches, removes, or disturbs the body, clothing, or any article upon or near the body, with the intent to alter the evidence or circumstances surrounding the death, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0406/ch0406.htm

Ya check Westlaw yet? I'm not coming up with anything yet. (Been too busy )

 

[Chezhire]

Here's another one that makes it a misdemeanor.

406.12 Duty to report; prohibited acts.--It is the duty of any person in the district where a death occurs, including all municipalities and unincorporated and federal areas, who becomes aware of the death of any person occurring under the circumstances described in s. 406.11 to report such death and circumstances forthwith to the district medical examiner. Any person who knowingly fails or refuses to report such death and circumstances, who refuses to make available prior medical or other information pertinent to the death investigation, or who, without an order from the office of the district medical examiner, willfully touches, removes, or disturbs the body, clothing, or any article upon or near the body, with the intent to alter the evidence or circumstances surrounding the death, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0406/ch0406.htm

So...legally, anyone who had knowledge of WHERE Caylee's body was lying obviously KNEW she was deceased and since, prior to that, the entire defense was proceeding loudly with the "Caylee is alive" yadda yadda, seems FL requires that the one who KNEW she was dead had a duty "to report such death" at a minimum.

 

[babycat]

(I can't seem to stop refreshing this thread- lots of good thoughts/exchanges! Always impressed by you guys.)

 

[sumbunny]

Well done Themis, Chez

Thank you!!!

 

[Chezhire]

Well done Themis, Chez

Thank you!!!

I did not post anything worth praising today (hehehe,) but Themis gets a :gold_crown: today in my book!

 

[racegirl72]

Has anyone thought that maybe the cell phone records show that it was Baez that DCasey was talking to on the phone during the "search?".........

 

[Mamabear1963]

my head is spinning....I actually went through all 14 pages...it took me most of the morning...

I don't understand a lot...but thank you all for the explanations.

This case is getting stranger and stranger....but at least Judge Strickland is on top of things...I can't help but like him.

I wonder though...does a circus like this happen often in courts...do the A's hold the corner on the market?:crazy:

 

[ThoughtElf]

Has anyone thought that maybe the cell phone records show that it was Baez that DCasey was talking to on the phone during the "search?".........

Doubt it. DC had multiple phones with him during the searches, one of which was most likely to have been a pre-paid cell. Quite possibly like the one JB allegedly provided Annie with.

His personal phone will probably on have records for the psychic and calls with his sick daughter.

 

[ThoughtElf]

I did not post anything worth praising today (hehehe,) but Themis gets a :gold_crown: today in my book!

Stop with the modesty. There is enough Kahlua to go around.

You guys are always appreciated - especially for guiding us lay-folk along by the hand amongst your other tasks.

 

[Hell's Belle]

The sole purpose of my posts in exchange with you today were to ensure that others reading our exchanges understood that it is proper to say a violation of the attorney work product privilege (in FL, in LA, and, I might add, a lot of other jurisdictions in the US,) which you'd said was incorrect. Nothing more, nothing less.

I've already offered my opinions as to what I believe is in Judge Strickland's complaint. No need to rehash those.

Fair enough.

 

[Themis]

I did not post anything worth praising today (hehehe,) but Themis gets a :gold_crown: today in my book!

:blushingsmiley: Awww. Thanks.

Not my original idea. I just remembered a professional responsibility lecture. The lecture was about 32 years ago, so I can't remember case citation and I'm busy today so I can't spend the time to look. Lawyer was disbarred for failing to report location of a dead body. It violated a state statute.

If anyone wants to help research, you might try a free search engine like Cornell. http://www.law.cornell.edu/ :hug:

 

[Chezhire]

Themis - I've searched Westlaw for FL cases regarding FL stat. ann 405.50 and 405.16, and nothing I'm finding addresses our issue. Your search fruitful? :waitasec:
Thinking it's a little used portion of the statute...

 

[QB.]

Why then does the legal analyst at WFTV claim that no one has a legal obligation to call 911 if they discover a dead body and that the defense team would actually be in trouble if they did report the remains?

http://www.wftv.com/news/19130417/detail.html#-

Sorry, maybe I am dense and out of the loop - I am just trying to understand.

 

[Chezhire]

Why, then, does B. Sheaffer, the legal analyst at WFTV claim that no one has a legal obligation to call 911 if they discover a dead body and that the defense team would actually be in trouble if they did report the remains?

http://www.wftv.com/news/19130417/detail.html#-

Sorry, maybe I am dense and out of the loop - I am just trying to understand.

He's either winging it or did his own little quickie search in Westlaw, like I just did and which turned up nadda, even with the statutes Themis dug out for us, without doing the statutory search as Themis did. :doh:

 

[QB.]

good to know
Thank you
I had not meant to use his full name, should it be removed from your post as well? Don't want to break any rules here.

 

[TheCynic]

I still don't really understand how it could be legal not to report it. This wasn't just *any* dead body - it was certainly reasonable to believe the body was the focus of an active homicide invesgitation. How can it not be obstruction to withhold that information?

Also, how can it not be required to report something like this? It should be a misdemeanor, even if that's based solely on the fact that decomposing human remains has to be a potential public health threat...

 

[NSS]

Some have stated that JB and his agent, DC didn't have any duty to report an unfound, unclaimed dead body and that he had a duty to keep the attorney-client confidentiality. Not true. If there is a state statute that requires a person finding a dead body to report it, it must be reported. The report does not have to say how the body was found, but just that it was found. Not reporting the same is a professional ethics violation. Telling a private investigator under an attorney's hire to violate the reporting laws is also a violation of professional responsibility rules; an ethics violation. So, does Florida have such a statute requiring reporting of finding a dead body? Indeed it does.



The 2008 Florida Statutes

Title XXIX
PUBLIC HEALTHChapter 406
MEDICAL EXAMINERS; DISPOSITION OF DEAD BODIESView Entire Chapter
[SIZE=-1]406.50 Unclaimed dead bodies or human remains; disposition, procedure.--All public officers, agents, or employees of every county, city, village, town, or municipality and every person in charge of any prison, morgue, hospital, funeral parlor, or mortuary and all other persons coming into possession, charge, or control of any dead human body or remains which are unclaimed or which are required to be buried or cremated at public expense are hereby required to notify, immediately, the anatomical board, whenever any such body, bodies, or remains come into its possession, charge, or control. Notification of the anatomical board is not required if the death was caused by crushing injury, the deceased had a contagious disease, an autopsy was required to determine cause of death, the body was in a state of severe decomposition, or a family member objects to use of the body for medical education and research. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1](1) The person or entity in charge or control of the dead body or human remains shall make a reasonable effort to determine: [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1](a) The identity of the deceased person and shall further make a reasonable effort to contact any relatives of such deceased person. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1](b) Whether or not the deceased person is entitled to burial in a national cemetery as a veteran of the armed forces and, if so, shall make arrangements for such burial services in accordance with the provisions of 38 C.F.R. For purposes of this subsection, "a reasonable effort" includes contacting the county veterans service office or regional office of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1](2) Such dead human bodies as described in this chapter shall be delivered to the anatomical board as soon as possible after death. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1](3) Nothing herein shall affect the right of a medical examiner to hold such dead body or remains for the purpose of investigating the cause of death, nor shall this chapter affect the right of any court of competent jurisdiction to enter an order affecting the disposition of such body or remains. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1](4) In the event more than one legally authorized person claims a body for interment, the requests shall be prioritized in accordance with s. 732.103. [/SIZE]


[SIZE=-1]For purposes of this chapter, the term "anatomical board" means the anatomical board of this state located at the University of Florida Health Science Center, and the term "unclaimed" means a dead body or human remains that is not claimed by a legally authorized person, as defined in s. 497.005, for interment at that person's expense. History.--s. 6, ch. 28163, 1953; ss. 15, 35, ch. 69-106; s. 22, ch. 73-334; s. 1, ch. 91-168; s. 1, ch. 96-251; s. 1, ch. 2002-204; s. 141, ch. 2004-301. Note.--Former s. 245.06. [/SIZE]

http://www.flsenate.gov/statutes/in...earch_String="dead+body"&URL=CH0406/Sec50.HTM

I don't think Fl has any duty to report statutes for private citizens. I think the above refers to bodies discovered by officers of the court or LE etc.

I underlined and changed to black, the 2nd part of that statute, which negates the first part, from what we already know in this case

 

[NSS]

Why then does the legal analyst at WFTV claim that no one has a legal obligation to call 911 if they discover a dead body and that the defense team would actually be in trouble if they did report the remains?

http://www.wftv.com/news/19130417/detail.html#-

Sorry, maybe I am dense and out of the loop - I am just trying to understand.

Because Fl has no "good samaritan" obligations in law.
Officers of the court, county, city etc DO have certain duties under the cited statutes.
So if JB had found the remains, he'd have an ethical/legal quandry, but it was DC who went searching.

 

[Themis]

I don't think Fl has any duty to report statutes for private citizens. I think the above refers to bodies discovered by officers of the court or LE etc.

I underlined and changed to black, the 2nd part of that statute, which negates the first part, from what we already know in this case

Florida clearly does have a duty to report statute for private citizens "all other persons." The red highlighted language makes it so. The other language relates to public officials, but it has that pesky little word "and," but it also limits those private persons to the ones coming into posession, charge, or control of any dead human body or remains which are unclaimed.

The legal concept of possession, as you might know, can be very brief; like opening a bag or turning over a clump of something. "Possession" is just the intent to briefly touch or control a thing -- like intending to touch or turn over a rock. It doesn't mean you discover it first, take time to analyze what it is, think about it, weigh the moral or legal consequences and after a while decide not to possess it. It is just the briefest intent to exercise some minor amount of control over the thing; the person doesn't even have to form the knowledge of specifically what it is.

The second part does not negate the first part. Otherwise any dead body found, short of having a murder weapon sticking out of it, would not have to be reported. We also do not know exactly what the state of decomposition was when DC saw whatever he saw.

The legal differentiation between the term "dead human body" and "remains" are terms that describe a body that just died through the process something short of "severely" decomposed (think archaeologist dig site uncovering ancient remains). Essentially, if identification can still be done, then reporting would be mandatory.

Further, a coroner may be able to do a lot even showing the cause of death is a homicide and not necessarily have to find that the death was by a specific means.

You wondered whether or not the severely decomposed or coroner examination parts would negate the first part. No. Those are fact based exceptions. It may take some examination to ferret out those facts.

When interpreting statutes, words are not surplusage and they are not to be interpreted in ways that render the purpose or intent of the statute absurd. On the surplusage rule, we can't take those government positions being exclusive of any other private person who fits the specific definition. Therefore, the statute does apply a duty to report to private persons who meet that definition.

Further, a statutory scheme, like this chapter is read together. So, if the private person falls within the description given here, even if not a government official, employee etc, there is a duty to report.

In addition, there is the second statute that also requires reporting and makes it a misdemeanor. That statute also applies to private persons.

As to "good samaritan laws," that is an analysis that is done when deciding whether or not there is a tort: duty, breach, proximate cause of an injury and damages. It is not a relevant legal analysis here. Here, the duty is not he same "duty" as in a tort case. Here, there is a duty created by statute. (Yes, I know a violation of a statute can be the basis for showing a duty in a tort case.) A private cause of action for a tort violation is not the focus here. The focus is Public health and welfare. Violation of this statutory duty is a misdemeanor, a criminal offense.

Appreciate the discussion and point of view, but I beg to disagree.:blowkiss:

 

[Themis]

I still don't really understand how it could be legal not to report it. This wasn't just *any* dead body - it was certainly reasonable to believe the body was the focus of an active homicide invesgitation. How can it not be obstruction to withhold that information?

Also, how can it not be required to report something like this? It should be a misdemeanor, even if that's based solely on the fact that decomposing human remains has to be a potential public health threat...

There is a statutory duty, it is a misdemeanor, the purpose of the statute is public health and welfare as well as enforcement of criminal laws. Since there is a duty, it could be obstruction. I'd have to think about that some more, but it is a line of thinking that has some merit and can't be ruled out at this time.