![]() ![]() Of extortion requires the prosecution to prove Thus, as a Colorado federal district court decision explained, proof (I) Performing or causing an unlawful act to be performed. (b) The person threatens to cause the results described in paragraph To refrain from performing a lawful act, makes a substantial threat to "(a) The person, without legal authority and with the intent to induceĪnother person against that other person’s will to perform an act or ¶ 49 As pertinent here, a person commits criminal extortion if To prove her guilty of criminal extortion. Threats of litigation to cause “economic hardship” were insufficient ¶ 48 Knox contends, the People concede, and we agree that Knox’s With me so that way we didn’t have to pursue it in court.” Testified that she perceived it as an attempt to “make a one-time deal If that works for you, or u would rather draw it out in court.ĭiedrichs-Giffin did not respond to the message and Medical bills, since im in and out of hospital already Let me know, Going back to court over several months, insurance goin up, and my ![]() We canĮven sign something if u want.to keep out of a long court proceeding Rather u help me out we agree to a one time feesable amount. Management and am going through hard times like everyone.im sure.id "Hey amber, this is Ashley the young lady, u hit.i have a littleĪmount of time if i want to pursue, court action…im already on pain Text message underlying the eventual criminal extortion charge and Messages asking to settle matters outside of court. ¶ 4 Later the same day, Knox sent Diedrichs-Giffin a series of text Theĭispatcher told her that, without an injury, she did not need to fileĪ report but if Knox contacted law enforcement officials later, theyĬould refer to the recording of Diedrichs-Giffin’s call. ¶ 3 Shortly afterward, Diedrichs-Giffin called 911 to report theĪccident, expressing her uncertainty about who was at fault. Stating, “We could settle this now.” Knox walked away - seemingly uninjured - after Diedrichs-Giffin directed Knox to contact Diedrichs-Giffin’s insurance company. To contact law enforcement officials and asked for “weed” or money, Provided her insurance and contact information however, Knox declined Knox responded that her “leg kind of hurts.”. When Diedrichs-Giffin asked if Knox was okay, Her car when she heard a “bang” as Knox forcefully placed her hands on ![]() ¶ 2 On November 26, 2014, Amber Diedrichs-Giffin was turning left in The ruling says in the pertinent parts (emphasis added) that: A published decision of the Colorado Court Of Appeals issued today is on point and holds that threatening to sue does not constitute extortion, reversing a trial court conviction entered on that theory. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |