 |
8.5-1 Falsely Reporting an Incident in the First Degree -- § 53a-180 (a) (1)
Revised to December 1, 2007
The defendant is charged [in count __] with falsely reporting an incident in the first degree. The statute defining this offense reads in pertinent part as follows:
a person is guilty of falsely reporting an incident in the first degree when, knowing the information reported, conveyed or circulated to be false or baseless, such person initiates or circulates a false report or warning of an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a fire, explosion, catastrophe or emergency under circumstances in which it is likely that public alarm or inconvenience will result.
For you to find the defendant guilty of this charge, the state must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
Element 1 - Reported a fire,
explosion, catastrophe or emergency
The first element is that the
defendant initiated or circulated a report or warning about an alleged
occurrence or impending occurrence of a fire, explosion, catastrophe or
emergency. <Insert specific allegations.>
Element 2 - False or baseless
The second element is that the
information reported or contained in such report or warning was false or
baseless. "False" means not true. "Baseless" means groundless, without any
foundation in fact.
Element 3 - Knowledge
The third element is that the
defendant knew that such information was false or baseless. A person acts "knowingly"
with respect to conduct or circumstances when (he/she) is aware that (his/her)
conduct is of such nature or that such circumstances exist. <See
Knowledge, Instruction 2.3-3.>
Element 4 - Public harm or
inconvenience
The fourth element is that the
defendant initiated or circulated such false report or warning under
circumstances in which it was likely that public alarm or inconvenience would
result.
"Public" refers to a whole body of people or an entire community, or the inhabitants of a particular place, or a neighborhood, or the people at large. "Inconvenience" means serious hardship or injustice to individuals.
Conclusion
In summary, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that 1) the defendant initiated or circulated a report or warning about an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a fire, explosion, catastrophe or emergency, 2) the report or warning was false or baseless, 3) the defendant knew that the report was false or baseless, and 4) (he/she) acted under circumstances in which it was likely that public alarm or inconvenience would result.
If you unanimously find that the state
has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements of falsely reporting
an incident in the first degree, then you shall find the defendant guilty. On
the other hand, if you unanimously find that the state has failed to prove
beyond a reasonable doubt any of the elements, you shall then find the defendant
not guilty.