◆ SpookStack

¢ - Ba Memorandum to Director from Legal Counsel RE: ABSCAM . to Members of Congress, are silent on any such duty. Both sections target the transfer or agreement to transfer something of value. The Ethics in Government Act of 1978, Pub. L. No. 95-521, 92 Stat. 1824, imposes a duty to report certain financial activities, but its focus is upon income which.is actually realized. In-any event, its reporting requirements are not directed toward reporting to a law enforcement agency. Similarly, the rules of ethics for both the House of Representatives and the Senate only prohibit the receipt of unauthorized income and impose no duty to report improper offers. Rules of the House of Representatives, Sections 939 and 940, H.R. Doc. No. 95-403, 95th Cong., 2d Sess. 631-652 (1978); Senate Manual, Standing Rules of the Senate, Sections 42, 43, and 45, S. Doc. No. 95-1, 95th Cong., lst Sess. 68-93, 96-101, (1977). As a general rule, persons are not required to report offenses they may know about, and mere failure to notify an officer is no crime, R. Perkins, Criminal Law 517 (2d ed. 1969). Punishment under modern criminal law for mere nondisclosure of knowledge of a crime is considered to be wholly inconsistent with American law and procedure. Id., 516. A rule to the contrary would allow law enforcement to target and prosecute individuals almost regardless of what action they took. If a Congressman accepted a bribe offered by an undercover officer, then he could be prosecuted for bribery. If, however, he did not accept it, a contrary rule would allow prosecution if he took no action at all. Apparently only one jurisdiction has made it a criminal offense to fail to report an offer of a bribe. See, Perkins, supra, 480. The federal Misprison of Felony statute, Title 18, U.S.C., Section 4, comes closest to the facts at hand here, but still does not apply. That section requires not only failure to disclose knowledge of a federal felony, but also some affirmative act of concealment beyond mere failure to report the felony. U.S. v. Johnson, 546 F.2d 1225 (5th Cir. 1977); U.S. v. Daddano, 432 F.2d 1119, 1124 (7th Cir. 1970), cert. denied, 402 U.S. 905, 91 S.Ct. 1366, 28 L.Ed. 2d 645 (1971). Under the facts in the above-described situations, no affirmative act of concealment is present, and therefore one element of the offense is lacking. ae = - =