Shoplifting, Larceny, Robbery, Theft Attempted Extortion in CA

[couldawoulda]

Jurisdiction

California

I've been reading the penal codes in CA regarding extortion. Without providing potentially incriminating details, I just want to make sure I understand the code correctly: If the alleged criminal made a threat to reveal information for say, a sum of money, but the alleged victim never acted on the threat, or even acknowledged it, under the eyes of the law in CA, the crime that may have been committed is attempted extortion, correct?

What is the statute of limitations for attempted extortion and any related crime? If the statute passes, and the alleged criminal then reveals the information, is any crime committed? Can the victim sue for civil damages (emotional distress?) or is it only a criminal offense (prior to the SOL)?

The information isn't defamatory; it is factual.

I assume insanity could be a defense for such a crime? E.g. if the person were undergoing temporary psychosis.

 

[adjusterjack]

Is somebody blackmailing you or is this hypothetical?

 

[Foamback]

Yet another goat frottage thread

 

[Mark_A]

Is somebody blackmailing you or is this hypothetical?

Since the post said "Without providing potentially incriminating details" and talked about " insanity could be a defense for such a crime? E.g. if the person were undergoing temporary psychosis" my first reaction was the opposite.

 

[Mark_A]

From this link relating to CA law:

What Is the Difference Between Extortion and Blackmail?

The terms “extortion” and “blackmail” are often used interchangeably. In California, they are treated as the same offense defined by Penal Code 518 PC and punished similarly. However, there are some nuanced differences between these two types of acts, even though the penalties for extortion and...

www.egattorneys.com

Extortion is described as the use of coercion to obtain money, goods, or services from an individual. The coercion could be violence, the threat of violence, or the destruction of property. Threatened refusal to testify can also be classified as coercion.

Blackmail, in contrast, can be described as obtaining money, goods, or services from an individual by threatening to reveal embarrassing, incriminating, or socially damaging information.

Notably, blackmail is a crime regardless of the validity of the information. Even if you are threatening to reveal actual criminal activity, it is still blackmailing and illegal.

Since Californian law views extortion and blackmail as part of the same crime family, they are punished identically.

A successful act of blackmail or extortion (meaning the victim complied with the demand) is always charged as a felony. Attempted blackmail or extortion (meaning the threat was made, but the victim did not comply) can be charged as a felony or a misdemeanor, depending on the circumstances.

 

[army judge]

Yet another goat frottage thread

 

[zddoodah]

If the alleged criminal made a threat to reveal information for say, a sum of money, but the alleged victim never acted on the threat, or even acknowledged it, under the eyes of the law in CA, the crime that may have been committed is attempted extortion, correct?

Yes. PC 518, 519, 524.

What is the statute of limitations for attempted extortion and any related crime?

"And any related crime" is beyond vague, and the answer obviously depends on what crime you're talking about.

Attempted extortion under PC 524 "is punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not longer than one year or in the state prison or by fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by both such fine and imprisonment."

Subject to exceptions not relevant here, "prosecution for an offense not punishable by death or imprisonment in the state prison or pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170 shall be commenced within one year after commission of the offense."

If the statute passes, and the alleged criminal then reveals the information, is any crime committed?

Depends on the relevant facts and circumstances.

Can the victim sue for civil damages (emotional distress?) or is it only a criminal offense (prior to the SOL)?

Anyone can sue anyone for anything, but emotional distress is a form of damages, not a cause of action. There are causes of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent infliction of emotional distress. The latter would not be viable in a circumstance such as you described. It's not possible to assess intelligently the viability of an IIED claim without knowing all of the relevant facts.

I assume insanity could be a defense for such a crime?

Your assumption is correct.