Instruction 7.250, Criminal Model Jury Instructions for Use in the District Court

SILENT CALLS TO PUBLIC SAFETY ANSWERING POINTS

WILLFUL AND MALICIOUS COMMUNICATION OF FALSE

INFORMATION TO PUBLIC SAFETY ANSWERING POINTS

G.L. c. 269, § 14B(a)

The defendant is charged with willful and malicious

communication of false information to a facility responsible for

receiving or relaying 911 calls.

To prove the defendant guilty of this offense, the Commonwealth

must prove the following six things beyond a reasonable doubt.

First: that the defendant communicated with, or caused a

communication to be made to another;

Second: that the communication was to a facility responsible for

receiving or relaying 911 calls;

Third: that the defendant did so willfully;

Fourth: that the defendant did so with malice;

Fifth: that the communication contained information which the

defendant knew or had reason to know was false; and

Sixth: that the communication resulted in the dispatch of

emergency services to a nonexistent emergency or to the wrong

location of an actual emergency.

SILENT CALLS TO PUBLIC SAFETY ANSWERING POINTS

To prove the first element, the Commonwealth must prove

beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant either communicated

or caused a communication to be made to another. The

communication may be made in person, by phone, or by electronic

device or other method.

To prove the second element, the Commonwealth must prove

beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant communicated or

caused a communication to be made to a facility responsible for

receiving or relaying 911 calls. The facility must be one assigned the

responsibility of receiving 911 calls or directly dispatching emergency

services or transferring or relaying emergency 911 calls to other

public or private safety agencies or other public safety answering

points.

To prove the third element, the Commonwealth must prove

beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant acted willfully. An act

is “willful” if it is done intentionally and by design, in contrast to an

act which is done thoughtlessly or accidentally. A person acts

willfully if they intend the conduct and its harmful consequences.

SILENT CALLS TO PUBLIC SAFETY ANSWERING POINTS

To prove the fourth element, the Commonwealth must prove

beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did so maliciously. An

act is done with “malice” if it is done out of cruelty, hostility or

revenge. To act with malice, one must act not only deliberately, but

out of cruelty, hostility or revenge toward another.

To prove the fifth element, the Commonwealth must prove

beyond a reasonable doubt that the communication transmitted

information which the defendant actually knew or had reason to know

was false. You may examine the defendant’s actions and words, and

all of the surrounding circumstances, to help you determine the

extent of the defendant’s knowledge. You should consider all of the

evidence, and any reasonable inferences you draw from the evidence,

in determining whether the Commonwealth has proved beyond a

reasonable doubt, as it must, that the defendant acted with the

knowledge that the communication transmitted false information.

To prove the sixth element, the Commonwealth must prove

beyond a reasonable doubt that the communication resulted in the

dispatch of emergency services to a nonexistent emergency or to the

wrong location of an actual emergency.

SILENT CALLS TO PUBLIC SAFETY ANSWERING POINTS

If the Commonwealth has proved all of the elements beyond a

reasonable doubt, you should return a verdict of guilty. If the

Commonwealth has failed to prove one or more elements beyond a

reasonable doubt, you must find the defendant not guilty.

SILENT CALLS TO PUBLIC SAFETY ANSWERING POINTS

WILLFUL AND MALICIOUS COMMUNICATION OF SILENT CALLS TO

PUBLIC SAFETY ANSWERING POINTS

G.L. c. 269, § 14B(b)

The defendant is charged with willful and malicious

communication of three or more silent calls to a facility responsible

for receiving or relaying 911 calls.

To prove the defendant guilty of this offense, the Commonwealth

must prove the following five things beyond a reasonable doubt.

First: that the defendant made, or caused to be made, three or

more silent calls;

Second: that the defendant made those calls, or caused those

calls to be made, to a facility responsible for receiving or relaying 911

calls;

Third: that the defendant did so willfully;

Fourth: that the defendant did so with malice; and

Fifth: that the communication caused the dispatch of emergency

services three or more times.

To prove the first element, the Commonwealth must prove

beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant made, or caused to be

SILENT CALLS TO PUBLIC SAFETY ANSWERING POINTS

made, three or more silent calls. A “silent call” is a call or other

communication made to a facility responsible for receiving or relaying

911 calls in which the calling party fails to provide information

regarding their identity or location or the nature of the emergency.

Note: The automatic transmission of information does not constitute the providing of

information; thus, it falls within the definition of a silent call. See G.L. c. 269, § 14B (“The

initiating party shall not be considered to have provided any information that is

automatically transmitted by a communication device or network upon connection with a

PSAP including, but not be limited to, automatic location information and automatic

number information.”)

To prove the second element, the Commonwealth must prove

beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant made those calls or

caused those calls to be made to a facility assigned the responsibility

of receiving or relaying 911 calls. The facility must be one assigned

the responsibility of receiving 911 calls or directly dispatching

emergency services or transferring or relaying emergency 911 calls to

other public or private safety agencies or other public safety

answering points.

To prove the third element, the Commonwealth must prove

beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did so willfully. An act

is “willful” if it is done intentionally and by design, in contrast to an

SILENT CALLS TO PUBLIC SAFETY ANSWERING POINTS

act which is done thoughtlessly or accidentally. A person acts

willfully if they intend the conduct and its harmful consequences.

To prove the fourth element, the Commonwealth must prove

beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did so maliciously. An

act is done with “malice” if it is done out of cruelty, hostility or

revenge. To act with malice, one must act not only deliberately, but

out of cruelty, hostility or revenge toward another.

To prove the fifth element, the Commonwealth must prove

beyond a reasonable doubt that the communication caused the

dispatch of emergency services three or more times.

If the Commonwealth has proved all of the elements beyond a

reasonable doubt, you should return a verdict of guilty. If the

Commonwealth has failed to prove one or more elements beyond a

reasonable doubt, you must find the defendant not guilty.