united-states criminal-law theft
Could you steal money from a criminal organization and publicly declare it without legal repercussions?
<p>A random idea I had based on shows like squid game, or others that feature death games.</p>
<p>In a real world setting in the USA, you have knowledge and details of an ongoing criminal organization without ever participating or working with them.</p>
<p>You intend to come forward to the police with that knowledge with the intent of taking down or hindering said criminal organization before filing for witness protection.</p>
<p>Let’s say in front of you is a lockbox containing ten million dollars in illegally gained dollars by the organization.</p>
<p>You decide to take it on your way out.</p>
<p>Could you publicly and legally declare the money you stole without any legal repercussions?</p>

<p>Stealing money is theft, see <a href="https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9a.56&amp;full=true" rel="noreferrer">RCW Chapter 9a.56</a> in Washington, and analogous laws in other jurisdictions. What you describe is theft, as defined under RCW 9A.56.020, and that is a crime. Defenses are available only in case of an open taking made under a good faith claim to title to the property (&quot;it's my money&quot;), or an irrelevant defense related to pallet theft from a pallet recycler. There is no exception arising for goods &quot;in the possession of a criminal organization&quot;.</p>
<p>There is also no applicable attainder process for declaring an organization to be a &quot;criminal organization&quot; to which such an exception could be referred, in Washington or any other state that I am familiar with. At the federal level, <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-96" rel="noreferrer">18 USC Ch. 96</a> does not have a provision for declaring some organization to be a &quot;criminal organization&quot;, but it does prohibit using proceeds from &quot;a pattern of <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&amp;height=800&amp;iframe=true&amp;def_id=18-USC-1935430617-1438920309&amp;term_occur=5&amp;term_src=title:18:part:I:chapter:96:section:1962" rel="noreferrer">racketeering activity</a>&quot; that a person or organization participated in, to support a business engaged in interstate or foreign commerce. There is an extensive but specific list of trigger crimes, which are all federal crimes. Supposing that a state wanted to make it legal to steal from criminals, there would have to be a suitable definition of &quot;criminal&quot;. Compare the various sex offender laws, where under dell-defined circumstances, a person is legally declared to be a sex offender required to register.</p>
<p>If the property is in fact the proceeds of a criminal activity (not merely &quot;in the possession of a criminal&quot;) or is used to support criminal activities, it might be seized under <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/21291/why-hasnt-civil-asset-forfeiture-been-ruled-unconstitutional">civil forfeiture</a> statutes. However, those statutes only allow the government to seize the property – vigilante civil forfeiture is still theft, a crime for which you can be prosecuted. The state might seize such assets and, when challenged in court, may have to prove that the assets a seizable (this is highly jurisdiction-dependent). The prospects that a prosecutor will turn a blind eye to a theft on the grounds that the victims are criminals is pretty small. More likely, everything gets seized and everybody gets prosecuted.</p>

<h2>Not with Assurance</h2>
<p>That the money was already stolen, or otherwise illegally gained does not entitle the whistleblower (who I will call W) to take it. W is still guilty of theft. The authorities <strong>might</strong> choose not to prosecute W, because of W's assistance in hindering the criminal organization, assuming that assistance proved as valuable as W expects that it will. But they might choose to prosecute W, and if W openly declares this money, it might provide the evidence needed. Depending on the exact details of the situation, of course.</p>
<p>Also if W wants to take this money into witness protection, it might make it easier for the criminal organization to trace W and take revenge, and eliminate W as a witness. That is a significant added risk, and the witness protection program might refuse to accept W under those conditions.</p>
