Dear Editor:

It’s not often we get a chance to explore the causes of law, but thanks to political players we are in the midst of a revealing event that promises to educate us all.

Looking at the root of these two words, bribery and extortion, on the surface they seem to achieve the same effect: one individual gets what they want. Bribery and extortion have many elements in common, both are criminal offenses, but the law differentiates them based on the manner in which the exchange occurs and the intent to do harm.

Key is the relationship between the person receiving, and the person giving. Extortion may or may not involve public officials, while bribery mostly involves public officials.

In extortion the extorting individual (receiver of goods) is not offering anything to the extorted individual, the giver. The receiver is actually making a threat towards the extorted party, threatening to perform a certain act that will harm the extorted party unless the extorted party gives the receiver whatever the receiver requests. The threat to do harm is the test for extortion. In bribery the bribed party will then do something in favor of the bribing party.

One is a threat to do harm and the other is asking for a favor. Maine’s Title 17-A refers to extortion as theft by extortion and defines harm as substantially causing harm with respect to that person's health, safety, business, calling, career, financial condition, reputation or personal relationships. As a Class C crime it is punishable by up to five years’ imprisonment and a fine of up to $5,000.

As this story unfolds, remember these differences and continue your education and understanding of how law works and justice prevails in a democracy.

Jarryl Larson

Edgecomb