Blackmail as a criminal act: legal and ethical paradoxes

Defending the Blackmailer

An introduction to blackmail

Blackmail is a term used when someone gives threats to a person whose secrets he/she knows along with the fact that they want to hide those secrets. While blackmailing the blackmailer asks for some sort of valuable good in order to keep his/her silence and if that particular amount of goods is given to the blackmailer the secret remains safe. However, the thing to be kept in mind here is that there is no way of being sure if the blackmailer will come back or not (Block, 2010).

Since, the blackmailer wants something of interest in order to keep his silence, if he is not given what he has asked for, it is very much possible that he would start telling the secrets and nothing can really be done about that as, all he would be doing is making use of freedom of expression. Therefore, in case of rejecting the blackmail offer one should be ready to face the consequences of their actions (Block, 2001).

Blackmail can't only be when a person tries to threaten to expose someone's secrets it can also be used to help someone get dirt on a competitor or opposition in return for some kind of favor of course. However, it might seem like the blackmailer is just asking for some kind of goods such as money to keep the information with him (instead of disclosing it) or that otherwise he would just make use of his right to speak and there is nothing illegal in it but the truth of the matter is that blackmailing is illegal and it is considered a crime and of course for the right reasons as well. As, no one has the right to go on threatening people, if they have some information about some illegal activity committed by a person they need to let the authorities know about it rather than thinking of what they can get out of it (Block, 2001).

If blackmailing is looked at in such a way that it is the offer or a threat which is made if the blackmailer doesn't get his demands fulfilled such as: if a person is threatening to expose some information that is embarrassing to someone or if he is saying that he won't seduce one's fiance if he gets the money then, if these two acts are separately looked upon we reach the decision that neither telling information nor the seduction is criminal act when they are committed separately then how come they become illegal when they are combined together (Block, 2001)?

It is very important to know and understand that blackmailing is an act which is very much different than extortion although it does look like they are similar. However, it has to be kept in mind that when money is being asked for to refrain from doing something legal it is a different issue whereas, when an extortionist asks a person for some money otherwise he will put their office building on fire is a completely different issue as, he is threatening them to commit an illegal act if he isn't paid to do otherwise (Block, 2001).

Various forms of Blackmail

Secrets can be exposed by two main methods: blackmailing and gossip. However, the main difference between the two is that in blackmailing the person can be kept quite if paid the amount that he wants whereas, in case of gossip, it will spread anyway and without any kind of warning. Therefore, when it comes to keeping the secrets safe blackmailer is a better option than the gossiper as, he will be able to keep the secrets safe for a price which can't be said for the person spreading the gossips (Block, 2010).

The reason why the person spreading the gossip is considered to be a lot more dangerous than the one who is blackmailing is because in case of the gossiper you have everything to lose while with the blackmailer if a person feels that the price being asked for is less than the secret, it is a wise option to go with what the blackmailer wants because although the person will be choosing lesser of the two evils but at least the secrets will be safe (Block, 2010).

There is another scenario in which the person being blackmailed might have to deny the demands of the blackmailer; this kind of scenario takes place when the price for silence that is being asked by the blackmailer is a lot more than the secret is worth. In case of a situation like this the person spreading gossips and the blackmailer are equally dangerous as, they will both be spreading the information that will hurt or humiliate others. However, in this case the information spread by the blackmailer can prove to be a lot worse than the one spread by the gossiper as, people at times tend to dismiss what is said by the gossiper (Block, 2010).

Blackmail is not always in the form of 'money for silence' but this is the most common type of blackmail. At times people can make other demands as well so, basically blackmailing is all about the threats delivered to people. Also, blackmailing in itself isn't really illegal i.e. until and unless some particular demands aren't met. Therefore, it is difficult to take legal actions against blackmailing without proper proof and certainty that the actions being done are illegal (Block, 2010).

It has always been very important how people perceive various actions, for example, there are a lot of actions that are done by the public which can qualify as blackmailing but they are appreciated by the people as, they are seen as the acts of great courage and are given a lot of respectability. The labor unions strikes or boycotts are a perfect example of public blackmailing as, the union members refuse to work until and unless their demands are met and if the contractors hire other people to work for them then these strikers assert. This kind of behavior is a perfect example of an act which in itself isn't illegal and it will be carried out if some particular demands aren't agreed upon (Block, 2010).

Ten different cases have been described by Fletcher (as cited in Block, 2001) in his paper in order to be examples of blackmailing that can be used to help understand various theories. In these examples D. And V are the two assumed individuals (Block, 2001).

1. Tort case: D's car has been hit by V's car and D. has threatened V that if V won't pay for the damage D. will sue him.

2. Late employee: D. is V's employer and V has been threatened by him that V will be fired if he doesn't come to work on time.

3. Crime case: D. has not been paid and so D. has threatened V to report the probable crime committed by him to the local newspaper.

4. Hush money: V is a huge celebrity and D. has threatened him to tell the media a damaging truth about V such as, drug use, unless V pays him the "hush money."

5. Baseball case: D. has a baseball which has an autograph by Babe Ruth and he offers to sell it to V for $6,000 as, he knows that V has a kid whose is very ill and having that autograph ball will make him happy.

6. Political embarrassment: D. is a black activist and has anti-white views where as V is a black political candidate and is uncomfortable about his association with D. D threatens V to pay him a particular amount of money otherwise D. will tell the media about V's support of D's anti-white ideas which will affect V's political career.

7. Dinner kiss: D. is threatening V that he won't kiss V if they won't go out for dinner.

8. Paid silence: V is a black political candidate and D. is against white people therefore, V goes to D. And pays him $20,000 to keep his silence until the elections are over.

9. Tattoo case: D. threatens to get his complete body tattooed until and unless he isn't pay a specific sum of money.

10. Lascivious employer: V has been threatened by her employer D. To sleep with him or V will get fired.

The threats involved in blackmail

When talking about the threats that are included in the whole blackmailing activity it has been observed that the threats are feared and misunderstood a lot more than the concept of blackmailing itself. Although initially everyone believes that giving threats is a very immoral thing to do however, it is mainly the concept of aggression that makes one do what the other person is saying, for example, if a bus driver is charging a lot more on a deserted road the passenger would probably agree to paying the bus driver to avoid his aggressive behavior (Block, 2010).

Therefore, there is only one major difference between the gossips and blackmailing that, in blackmailing there is still some chance of keeping the blackmailer silent whereas, you can't stop the person who is spreading the gossip (Block, 2010).

It is very important to know about the nature of the threats as well as, in a case that the blackmailer is threatening of violence there needs to be a proper action taken against such behavior as, no one has any right to be violent against people and to make the people fearful (Block, 2010).

It is really difficult to call a threat an "illegitimate" act as, mostly the threat made by the blackmailer are his/her right such as: the right to speak, or to refuse to give their services to certain stores or to persuade other people to do what he is doing, therefore, as these threats aren't really illegitimate it is very difficult to call the threats an illegal action (Block, 2010).

If blackmailing is looked at in such a way that it is the offer or a threat which is made if the blackmailer doesn't get his demands fulfilled such as: if a person is threatening to expose some information that is embarrassing to someone or if he is saying that he won't seduce your fiance if he gets the money then, if you look at these two acts separately we reach the decision that neither telling information nor the seduction is criminal act when they are committed separately then how come they become illegal when they are combined together (Block, 2001)?

It is very important to know and understand that blackmailing is an act which is very much different than extortion although it does look like they are similar. However, it has to be kept in mind that when money is being asked for to refrain from doing something legal it is a different issue whereas, when an extortionist asks you for some money otherwise he will put your office building on fire is a completely different issue as, he is threatening you to commit an illegal act if he isn't paid to do otherwise (Block, 2001).

Legitimizing blackmail

If legitimizing blackmail has to be considered it would have to be considered with regards to the legal code of the libertarian political philosophy and in order to that it is firstly important to define the terms first. According to Murray Rothbard this legal code would emphasize on the libertarian principle regarding not using aggression on any person or any kind of property, [and] the property right have to be defined with regards to the libertarian principle (Block, 2001).

In light of this law people can do whatever they wish for; however, they have to keep in mind, the fact that they can't turn violent or aggressive against anyone and that if they have the right to do whatever they want then so do the other people. In this way no one can really get hurt and everyone can be happy (Block, 2001).

It was in 1997 that Fred McChesney who was a law professor in the Cornell University said that extortion and blackmailing are a result of the modern regulatory process. To say it all in a concise manner: the legislation or the regulations are "threatened" by the politicians to control the prices or to increase them and since these practices would reduce the profit margins the concerned companies in order to stop these laws from passing start contributing to the political campaigns or compensate the politicians personally by, for example giving their relative various high levels jobs, sponsor luxurious vacations etc. (DiLorenzo, 2000).

It is the job of the politicians to make sure that the legislation gets the contributions for the political campaign from the cash cow of the industry. It was said by a California legislator that a politician who will be needing funds for his campaign will have a bill that he will get introduced and that bill will cause some excitement among the constituency and they will start working for the defeat of the bill which is not difficult to achieve but it will definitely start the contributions coming in for the campaign (DiLorenzo, 2000).

In case that there existed a forsworn relationship between the blackmailer and the person being blackmailed then the blackmailing will be illegitimate. For example, if a person had a secret and he told that secret to an investigator or a lawyer under strict confidence that the secret will be kept safe but later on that lawyer or the investigator starts blackmailing him then it is the violation of their contract and this kind of blackmailing will be illegitimate (Block, 2010).

However, in case that some person got hold of that secret and he doesn't have any kind of contract to keep that secret safe he/she offer to sell the secret and it will be completely legitimate (Block, 2010).

Although there are many innocent people who suffer because of these blackmailers but mainly there are two main groups that are mostly the focus of attention of the blackmailers (Block,2010).

One group is in which there are criminals such as; murderers, thieves, cheater, swindlers, rapists etc. And the other group is the ones in which the activities performed by the people aren't really illegitimate however, they are not exactly in accordance with the principles of the society for example, homosexuals, sexual perverts, adulterers etc. (Block, 2010).

In case of the criminal group the chances of the activities involved in blackmailing to be extremely illegal is very huge and the main reason behind this is the fact that the criminals have a background which proves that they can go to extremes and this is a huge reason why there are a lot of people who are forced to carry on with their criminal career as they are afraid that if they don't do what their fellow criminals are asking them to do then they will be blackmailed (Block, 2010).

There are those people as well that are literally on the extent of committing some sort of a crime and even the least bit of blackmailing will be enough for them to commit the illegal act however, in this scenario there is also this possibility that little support will help them in not committing the crime (Block, 2010).

Therefore, from all these above mentioned scenarios it can be said that the legitimization of blackmailing can actually prove to be very dangerous, a lot more than the blackmailing is at the moment as, then more and more people will be doing it (Block, 2010).

It is said at times that the thing that discourages the criminal from committing an illegal act is the fear of getting caught and not the penalty or the punishment itself. Therefore, when blackmailing will be legitimized there will be no fear in the minds of the people of getting caught as it won't be legal until and unless what they do doesn't violate the rules so, obviously more and more people will start doing it and there is a huge chance that the amount of crimes happening will increase a lot (Block, 2010).

However, at the same time it is hugely possible that the legitimization of blackmailing will help in decreasing the crime rate as, what will happen is that the crime fighting authorities can work on the basis of "divide and rule" as more and more people will start using the stuff that they know against each other and therefore, more and more criminals might get caught which will help in fighting and decreasing the real crimes (Block, 2010).

The legitimization of blackmail will probably also have beneficial effects on the action that are not really aggressive however, they are not according to the principles of the society. In fact, it can still be seen that although blackmailing is illegal but it is having this positive effect on the actions that are not according to the principles of the society (Block, 2010).