united-states criminal-law police rules-of-evidence law-enforcement
Can law enforcement dig up endangered plants to recover evidence of a crime?
<p>According to <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/memes/comments/lci9rg/if_you_ever_need_to/" rel="noreferrer">this meme</a> if you bury a body underneath an endangered plant, it is then illegal for law enforcement to dig up the body. Is this true?</p>

<h2>The Meme is Incorrect</h2>
<p>Law enforcement in the <a href="/questions/tagged/united-states" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;united-states&#39;" rel="tag">united-states</a> may disturb or dig up plants that are listed as endangered species while unearthing evidence of a serious crime.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/16/1538" rel="nofollow noreferrer">16 U.S. Code § 1538</a> subsection (a) ,(2) provides that:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(2) Except as provided in sections 1535(g)(2) and 1539 of this title, with respect to any endangered species of plants listed pursuant to section 1533 of this title, it is unlawful for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to—</p>
</blockquote>
<p>...</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(B) remove and reduce to possession any such species from areas under Federal jurisdiction; maliciously damage or destroy any such species on any such area; or remove, cut, dig up, or damage or destroy any such species on any other area in knowing violation of any law or regulation of any State or in the course of any violation of a State criminal trespass law;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Digging up a member (or members) of an endangered plant species during a legitimate criminal investigation as part of a focused search for evidence would not be to &quot;<strong>maliciously</strong> damage or destroy&quot; them, nor would it be in &quot;knowing violation of any law or regulation of any State&quot;.</p>
<p>This notion (that evidence is safe if buried under endangered plants) misunderstands what is prohibited by the law.</p>

<p>In <a href="/questions/tagged/england-and-wales" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;england-and-wales&#39;" rel="tag">england-and-wales</a> <em>all</em> wild plants are legally protected to varing degrees by <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/69/section/13?timeline=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">section 13</a> the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.</p>
<p>Those plants listed in <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/69/schedule/8?timeline=false" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Schedule 8</a> are protected by s.13(1)(a) and all others by s.13(1)(b)</p>
<blockquote>
<p>s.13(1) [ ... ] if any person—</p>
<p>(a) intentionally picks, uproots or destroys any wild plant included
in Schedule 8; or</p>
<p>(b) not being an authorised person, intentionally uproots any wild
plant not included in that Schedule,</p>
<p>he shall be guilty of an offence.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>However, s.13(3) provides a statutory defence that disproves the claim made in the OP's meme:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>s.13(3) Notwithstanding anything in subsection (1), a person shall not
be guilty of an offence by reason of any act made unlawful by that
subsection if he shows that the act was an incidental result of a
lawful operation and could not reasonably have been avoided.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The recovery of a body by the police (or other authorised person) following a suspicious death is a &quot;lawful operation&quot; which may include progressing a criminal investigation, making the deceased available for post mortem or to inform the mandatory <a href="https://www.gov.uk/after-a-death/when-a-death-is-reported-to-a-coroner" rel="nofollow noreferrer">coroner's inquest</a></p>
