May a person accept and keep bribes so long as they act lawfully?
<p>This isn't a situation I'm in, but rather something I'm curious about.</p>

<p>If a private person (outside of any position of authority) is bribed to keep an illegal act they witnessed secret, but chooses to report the crime to the police regardless, is that person able to keep the bribe?  </p>

<p>I know the contract is compromised by the criminal element, but does that negate the criminal portion of the agreement (letting the witness keep the bribe), negate the entire contract (requiring the bribe be returned to the criminal) or cause another outcome (bribe is surrendered to the state)?</p>

<p>Likewise, if the criminal informs police that they bribed the witness in exchange for silence, even though the witness reported the crime anyway and cooperated fully, is the witness thereby guilty of any crimes themselves?</p>

<p>Bribery always involves a public official or person with a legal duty (such as a witness in a legal proceeding). It is illegal for such a person to accept a bribe. See <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/201">18 USC 201</a>. We speak metaphorically about "bribing" when we aren't actually talking about the same thing as the legal concept.</p>

<p>Seen as a contractual matter outside the legal concept of bribery, a contract requiring a person to cover up a violation of the law would be unenforceable. However, it would be the crime of extortion to threaten to expose the criminal, so to rule that out, we would have to assume that the criminal knew that Jones <em>could</em> rat him out, and he offers Jones money to keep quiet. If the agreement were to "not testify", then that <em>would</em> be bribery.</p>

<p>In other words, we have an almost perfectly innocent person, who acted entirely legally (did not extort, is not a public official, did not accept money in connection with testifying in court), and accepted money given for an unenforceable purpose which was breached. Their only fault was accepting payment to not turn a criminal in (and even then, they <em>did</em> turn him in). I can't find relevant US case law that definitely rules one way or the other. I believe though that the court would not order the money returned to the criminal – the court would do nothing to validate such a contract.</p>

<p>Putting aside if the paying/receiving of bribes is an offence against the state (because it is circumstantial); let's just assume that it is.</p>

<p>A contract for an illegal purpose (like bribery as assumed) is void. That is, it is not a contract and the courts have no jurisdiction to intervene and make orders about it. So, the money stays where it is: if it has not been paid then the person to whom it was promised cannot claim it, if it has been paid the person who paid it cannot get it back.</p>

<p>In practice, the money could probably be seized by the state under "proceeds or crime" type legislation.</p>

<p>If one received a bribe, reported the same, and turned over the proceeds to the appropriate law enforcement agency, one might be able to recover a portion of the money under a whistleblower statute.</p>

<p>You described the crime of <strong><em>extortion</em></strong>. Not bribery.</p>

<p><em>I failed to keep my promise to the victim</em> is not an affirmative defense to the crime of extortion. The extorter is still guilty.</p>

<p>There is no lawful way to take a bribe. Hence the word 'bribe'. Even if you're not in an authoritative positive, getting caught taking a bribe will lead to aiding and abetting if the briber gets caught.</p>

<p>Lets use the example of a car accident:
Guy1 runs over Guy2 because he's intoxicated behind the wheel. You see this from across the street. Guy 1 comes up to you, hands you everything in his wallet, says "you didnt see anything" and runs. Now there's two ways this can go with taking the bribe:</p>

<p>A. You take the bribe and keep the money. Eventually cops knock on your door because they got you on camera and the locals know you frequent that street. You tell them you took money to be silenced and <strong><em>BAM</em></strong> you're slapped with Aiding and abetting.</p>

<p>B. You agree to the bribe but as soon as he runs you call the cops, they grab him eventually but during the interrogation process he informs them that he gave you money and <strong><em>BAM</em></strong> you're slapped with aiding and abetting.</p>

<p>So which do you choose? 
Turn to pg 236 for option A.
Turn to pg 34 for option B. </p>

united-states criminal-law contract-law