## Facts

- John Edward Wilson, a federal prisoner, was brought to court to testify for the government in a federal criminal trial.
- While U.S. Marshals escorted Wilson from the courtroom, three government witnesses sat in a hallway outside: Pauline Virginia Sawyer, Kimberly Renee Lindsey, and Patrick Charles Malone.
- As Wilson passed them, he pointed at the witnesses and made hostile, threatening remarks implying loyalty to the defendant on trial and disparaging the witnesses.
- Sawyer had not yet testified and became so upset that she tried to leave the courthouse and temporarily decided not to testify.
- Lindsey had already testified but had not yet been excused; she was upset and frightened by the remarks.
- Malone had testified and been excused; he viewed the remarks as idle threats.
- Wilson was indicted on three counts under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(1), one count per witness, alleging intentional harassment that hindered, delayed, prevented, dissuaded, or attempted to do so regarding attendance or testimony in an official proceeding.
- A jury convicted Wilson on all counts; post-verdict, the district court upheld Count 1 but entered judgments of acquittal on Counts 2 and 3 based on the view that the statute did not apply once the witnesses had already testified.

## Issues

1. Whether “harasses” in 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(1) requires repeated conduct or may be satisfied by a single incident.
2. Whether § 1512(b)(1) requires proof that the harassment actually succeeded in hindering or dissuading testimony, or whether an attempt is enough.
3. Whether § 1512(b)(1) applies to harassment directed at (a) a witness who has testified but not been excused and (b) a witness who has testified and been excused.

## Decision

- The Fourth Circuit affirmed the conviction on Count 1.
- The court reversed the Rule 29 acquittals on Counts 2 and 3 and reinstated the jury’s guilty verdicts.
- The court approved defining harassment as conduct designed to “badger, disturb, or pester,” rejecting a requirement of repeated attacks.
- The court held the statute covers attempts to hinder, delay, prevent, or dissuade testimony; actual success is not required.
- The court held § 1512(b)(1) protects witnesses who have already testified, including those not yet excused and those excused, when the conduct relates to their participation in the proceeding.

## Legal Principles

- Under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(1), “harasses” does not require a pattern of repeated acts; a single episode may qualify if intentionally directed at a witness and designed to badger, disturb, or pester in connection with testimony.
- The government need not prove that the defendant actually prevented or altered testimony; the statute expressly reaches conduct that attempts to hinder, delay, prevent, or dissuade attendance or testimony.
- Witness protection under § 1512(b)(1) extends beyond first-time prospective testimony to witnesses who have testified, whether or not excused, when the harassment is tied to their testimony in the official proceeding.
- On sufficiency review, evidence is considered in the light most favorable to the government when assessing whether the jury’s verdict is supported.

## Conclusion

The Fourth Circuit held that a single courthouse incident of intentionally threatening or disturbing remarks aimed at government witnesses can constitute harassment under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(1), that attempted interference is punishable even without proven success, and that the statute applies to witnesses who have already testified, leading to affirmance on Count 1 and reinstatement of the jury’s convictions on Counts 2 and 3.


United States v. Wilson, 796 F.2d 55 (4th Cir. 1986)