Massachusetts Witness Intimidation FAQs

G.L. c. 268, § 13B covers three kinds of conduct, done directly or indirectly: threatening, attempting, or causing physical, emotional, or economic injury or property damage; conveying a gift, offer, or promise of anything of value; or misleading, intimidating, or harassing. The protected circle is wide — witnesses and potential witnesses, anyone aware of relevant information, judges, jurors, police, court staff, and the family members of all of them. The Commonwealth must prove intent to interfere with an investigation or proceeding, or reckless disregard of that effect.

Always a felony. The baseline is up to 10 years in state prison, or 2½ years in a house of correction, with a fine of $1,000 to $5,000. Where the underlying matter involves a crime punishable by life imprisonment, the maximum rises to 20 years. There is no misdemeanor version.

The line is thinner than people think. A bare request is not automatically intimidation — the Appeals Court reversed a conviction where a defendant asked a witness to recant and offered favors, because nothing put the witness in fear. Commonwealth v. Ruano, 87 Mass. App. Ct. 98 (2015). But the same case confirms that offering anything of value to shape testimony violates the statute’s gift prong on its own, and context can turn a soft-spoken question into intimidation — “Are you sure you want to go on with this?” said the right way supported a conviction. Commonwealth v. Robinson, 444 Mass. 102 (2005).

No and no. The test is objective: what the conduct would do to a reasonable person, not what the particular witness felt, and the statute punishes attempts and offers that never work. Conduct need not even be overtly threatening — pointing a cell phone camera at a waiting witness was enough. Commonwealth v. Casiano, 70 Mass. App. Ct. 705 (2007).

It can be. The Supreme Judicial Court has held that depriving a potential witness of a phone when she seeks to report a possible crime can qualify as intimidation, and no investigation needs to exist yet. Commonwealth v. Fragata, 480 Mass. 121 (2018). The limit runs the other way too: in Fragata itself the conviction was reversed, because when the phone was taken no possible criminal violation had yet occurred. Facts and sequence decide these cases.

The statute says “whoever,” and it contains no exception for the complaining witness. An alleged victim who threatens or pressures another witness fits the plain text. A victim’s own refusal to testify is not § 13B conduct — courts address that through contempt — and recantation raises separate issues, covered in our post on recantation in Massachusetts domestic violence cases.

It is usually a different felony. Destroying or concealing evidence with intent to impair its availability is tampering under G.L. c. 268, § 13E, punishable by up to 10 years where a criminal proceeding is involved. Section 13B is aimed at people, § 13E at things — and the SJC has held that destroying evidence in plain view is not “misleading” under § 13B. Commonwealth v. Tejeda, 476 Mass. 817 (2017).

The doctrine that makes intimidation self-defeating. If the Commonwealth shows, by a preponderance at an evidentiary hearing, that a defendant helped procure a witness’s unavailability intending to do so, the witness’s out-of-court statements come into evidence and the confrontation objection is waived. Commonwealth v. Edwards, 444 Mass. 526 (2005). Collusion is enough, even through lawful means — marrying the witness so she could claim spousal privilege triggered it. Commonwealth v. Szerlong, 457 Mass. 858 (2010).

Yes. Section 13B is an enumerated predicate under G.L. c. 276, § 58A, so the charge by itself lets the Commonwealth move for a dangerousness hearing and pretrial detention. That is often the most immediate consequence of an intimidation count added to a domestic violence case.

Yes. The 2018 rewrite lists protected proceedings expressly: criminal investigations at any stage, grand jury, dangerousness and motion hearings, trials, probation and parole proceedings — and administrative hearings, probate and family court matters, clerk’s hearings, and “any other civil proceeding of any type.” Conduct around a clerk-magistrate hearing has supported convictions, and the restraining-order side is covered in our 209A and 258E violation FAQs.

Yes. A “potential witness at any stage of a criminal investigation” includes someone likely to participate in an investigation that has not yet begun. Preventing a person from calling the police about a possible crime can be intimidation even though no charges exist.

No. Section 13B stands on its own, and prosecutors often press the intimidation count hardest precisely because the underlying case has weakened. How the underlying charge actually gets dismissed — and what survives it — is covered on our page on how Massachusetts criminal cases get dismissed.

A second felony. Massachusetts makes secret recording a crime in itself, and a recording deployed to pressure a witness stacks wiretap exposure on top of § 13B. The rules — including for phone calls and home cameras — are on our page on Massachusetts wiretap law and secret recordings.