Intimidating a witness

COMMENTARY ON §710-1071 The potential for harm involved in witness intimidation is essentially similar to that involved in the offense of bribery of a witness, e.g., the undermining of the integrity of an extremely important part of the judicial process. The definition of the offense also parallels that of bribery of a witness, and the sanctions are identical. Note, however, that only the person who directs the force or threat against the witness is guilty of a crime. "Threat," as used in this section is any threat proscribed by the offense of criminal coercion under §707-724. To some extent, it would seem that the section on criminal coercion might suffice to deal with witness intimidation, but since the intimidation of a witness carries the additional harm of interfering with an official proceeding, it seems appropriate to impose a more severe sanction for the present offense. Previous Hawaii law had no provisions dealing specifically with the offense of witness intimidation. Case Notes Terroristic threatening not a lesser included offense of intimidating a witness within the meaning of §701-109(4)(a); multiple conviction of terroristic threatening and intimidating a witness not barred by §701-109(4)(c). 75 H. 517, 865 P.2d 157 (1994). Sufficient evidence that defendant directed threats to person whom defendant believed was about to be called as a witness where defendant phoned person soon after explicit warning from police officer that such conduct could be inferred as intimidating a witness. 82 H. 419 (App.), 922 P.2d 1032 (1996). Sufficient evidence that defendant intended to influence person's testimony by making threatening statements during phone call. 82 H. 419 (App.), 922 P.2d 1032 (1996).