Dr. Frank's What's-it

Don't Whistle at Whales

Marine biologist faces twenty years in federal prison for allegedly lying to federal prosecutors investigating the incident, in which the captain and a crew-member of a whale-watching excursion whistled at a humpback whale to encourage it to stick around their boats. The "lying" appears to have consisted of furnishing the feds with an excerpted video of the whistling rather than the total raw footage. A five-year investigation of all of her confiscated computers, devices, and files managed to turn up no basis for an actual charge of "whale harassment." She is, as she says, facing punishment for an effective absurdity: lying about her involvement in an event that didn't happen.

(The investigation was sparked by the captain's wife, who asked the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for clarification as to whether whistling was permitted under the law. Oops. Another mistake: don't ask the government for advice about whether or not you're complying with the law. Even if you are, they can figure out something to charge you with, and they will.)

Now I suppose there's a legitimate point in trying to prevent flagrant abuse of marine life, though whistling seems fairly benign. But surely once it's established that the underlying crime did not occur (e.g. that the whistling did not rise to the level of chargeable harassment) that should be the end of it. The government has no business concerning itself with inadvertent "lying" about the non-event. Yet in our increasingly dystopian system of criminal justice, the process is itself the punishment. Unfortunate innocents become ensnared in a complex network of nested "meta-crimes" with only a distant relation to anything that might have been intended or done. Endless and forever. Your only chance is to sit tight and hope they don't notice you. Good luck out there.