View Single Post
Old 04-24-2002, 02:04 AM   #6
Mason
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 158
Mason is on a distinguished road
A. Definition of “conspiracy”: The common-law crime of conspiracy is defined as an agreement between two or more persons to do either an unlawful act or a lawful act by unlawful means. At common law, the prosecution must show the following:

1. Agreement: An agreement between two or more persons;

2. Objective: To carry out an act which is either unlawful or which is lawful but to be accomplished by unlawful means; and

3. Mens rea: A culpable intent on the part of the defendant.

Therefore, simply allowing a discussion to take place does not make the IMP a conspirator. A prosecutor would not be able to establish an mens rea requirement upon the IMP as they never agreed to partake in any conspiracy. Moreover, merely discussing the prices of drugs is not a conspiracy, as there is no agreement to engage in a future illegal activity.

Privacy rights are also protected from interference from other people. Though not on point, the Omnibus Crime Control & Safe Streets Act is clearly an example of the Federal Legislature enacting a statute preventing private citizens from violating other's privacy rights vis-a-vis wiretapping.
Mason is offline   Reply With Quote