Comment by from
3 years ago
Then you should be able to tell us what defrauding someone of their intangible right of honest services encompasses :)
3 years ago
Then you should be able to tell us what defrauding someone of their intangible right of honest services encompasses :)
Is that supposed to be very complex legal language? I'm not sure if this is some reference I'm missing, but it sounds relatively simple to me: it seems to be an accusation that someone is providing services dis-honestly (i.e. hiding some aspect of how the service will be performed or how much it will cost).
The full scope of what that encompasses is very hard to know, as it depends on essentially every other regulation and common law practice and precedent that applies in the particular legal jurisdiction (and which jurisdiction that is can itself be a somewhat thorny issue).
But this problem isn't solvable by code. It's part of the intrinsic complexity of the legal system.
Whatever statute you're looking at likely defines "intangible right of honest services" and "defrauding."
> For the purposes of this chapter, the term “scheme or artifice to defraud” includes a scheme or artifice to deprive another of the intangible right of honest services.
That's it.