Hypothetical: someone (Party A) hit or stole from another person (party B), and then a report was made to the police. Party A confesses to the police, but then offers money to the police detective (who accepts), and brings monetary offer agreement to victim person as offer to influence actions of victim person to remove responsibility of legal duty/ criminal element.


1) What crimes have been committed?

2) Which parties are at fault or liable?

3) How could Party A sue faulty party or parties for described actions.

  • JEREMY HORTON: I have edited your question, in an attempt to make it more legible and attract higher quality answers. I have endeavored to not make changes to the substance of your question. If you feel that I have changed what your are asking, please feel free to make edits to the question using the "Edit" button. I welcome you to StackExchange, and encourage you to take the tour.
    – sharur
    Nov 27, 2019 at 0:09
  • 1
    Also, some questions to further improve your question: Where (in which jurisdiction, e.g. country, state) does this take place. Since the law is localized, where this occurred matters. Additionally, it was unclear who the offering party was (the offender or the police).
    – sharur
    Nov 27, 2019 at 0:13
  • What does “faulty party” mean or refer to here? No offer the cop could provide to person A would in any way remove anyone’s existing legal duties or liability for the crimes committed. Finally, it’s bribery, not extortion, and “hush money” isn’t a thing.
    – A.fm.
    Nov 27, 2019 at 1:48
  • So the incident i described is bribery from the perp and police right? Nov 27, 2019 at 10:51
  • Sounds like a law school exam question. Not definitive answer is possible unless you know which jurisdiction's laws apply.
    – ohwilleke
    Apr 27, 2020 at 4:19

1 Answer 1


What crimes have been committed?

  1. The initial assault (hit) or theft (stole) by A.
  2. Bribery by A and the detective.

Which parties are at fault or liable?

See above.

How could Party A sue faulty party or parties for described actions.

Party A, as the perpetrator, can't sue anyone.

Party B can sue party A for the assault or the theft as applicable. They have no cause of action on the bribery.

The state can prosecute A for assault or theft and bribery. The state can prosecute the detective for bribery.

  • Dale....party b/victim/plaintiff...could sue party a.... and party c/detective for obstruction...bribery bc partyc brought money agreement from party a to party b to avoid civil duty....causing party b mental anguish...risk...etc....also......is it legal due process violation bc direct governing criminal codes and investigative procedures were not followed correctly? Dec 2, 2019 at 13:09
  • I think DaleM is spot on correct.
    – ohwilleke
    Aug 25, 2020 at 4:09

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .