Deanh Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 The right invoke the 5th Amendment prohibition against self incrimination only applies in criminal matters. The right does not apply once immunity from prosecution is granted. Any Toyota execs who would be called to testify could be granted immunity and be required to testify. In addition, private separation agreements do not trump a valid subpoena. You cannot have an agreement to ignore a Court Order or to obstruct justice. The 5th Amendment is our strongest protection against government abuse in the criminal justice system. It was rightly placed in the Bill of Rights. so, if there has in fact been deaths caused at the knowledge of certain individuals whom MAY have been paid to remain Mum, makes it right?...it may be our strongest protection, but its also a get out of jail free for some that do NOT deserve it...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 (edited) No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Note the protections here: - you cannot be punished for a crime without being indicted and put on trial - the state cannot keep trying you until they get a conviction - you cannot be forced to confess - you cannot be imprisoned, nor can any of your property be taken from you without 'due process', which includes a fair payment for property acquired under eminent domain The Constitution and Bill of Rights are not perfect documents, as the American system is not perfect. As, in fact, no system is perfect. But the protection from abuse guaranteed by the fifth is nothing to sneeze at. --- And as Mark Morrow pointed out, you can be compelled to testify if the state, at its discretion gives you immunity from prosecution. Say you're a hit man, and you're sitting in stir because you got caught. The state's attorney (the DA, County Attorney, State's Attorney, or whatever name he goes by--or perhaps the US Attorney) tells you "We're not going to prosecute you for this crime." This immunity from prosecution negates your fifth amendment right to refuse to testify. You can only refuse to testify if your own hide is on the line. --- And if the state cannot meet the burden of proof without a confession from the party on trial, likely, the case was pretty weak to begin with. --- Finally, as Mark pointed out, the fifth amendment applies only to criminal proceedings. You cannot plead the fifth if you are a defendant in a CIVIL trial. If the state is trying to put you in prison, you can plead the fifth. If a private party is suing you for fifteen million dollars, you cannot plead the fifth. --- Mark will have to provide a bit of detail for you on when and if potentially criminal admissions during civil trials can be used in criminal courts. It's my understanding that if you admit to criminal conduct as part of a civil trial, the state cannot turn around and prosecute you using your statements during the civil trial. But Mark would know that better than me. --- The system is intended to avoid exploitation by the government, and it was the framers' belief that the organized exploitation of the law to oppress by the government was more detrimental than the disorganized exploitation of loopholes by criminals. Edited January 29, 2010 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 Note the protections here: - you cannot be punished for a crime without being indicted and put on trial - the state cannot keep trying you until they get a conviction - you cannot be forced to confess - you cannot be imprisoned, nor can any of your property be taken from you without 'due process', which includes a fair payment for property acquired under eminent domain The Constitution and Bill of Rights are not perfect documents, as the American system is not perfect. As, in fact, no system is perfect. But the protection from abuse guaranteed by the fifth is nothing to sneeze at. --- And as Mark Morrow pointed out, you can be compelled to testify if the state, at its discretion gives you immunity from prosecution. Say you're a hit man, and you're sitting in stir because you got caught. The state's attorney (the DA, County Attorney, State's Attorney, or whatever name he goes by--or perhaps the US Attorney) tells you "We're not going to prosecute you for this crime." This immunity from prosecution negates your fifth amendment right to refuse to testify. You can only refuse to testify if your own hide is on the line. --- And if the state cannot meet the burden of proof without a confession from the party on trial, likely, the case was pretty weak to begin with. --- Finally, as Mark pointed out, the fifth amendment applies only to criminal proceedings. You cannot plead the fifth if you are a defendant in a CIVIL trial. If the state is trying to put you in prison, you can plead the fifth. If a private party is suing you for fifteen million dollars, you cannot plead the fifth. --- Mark will have to provide a bit of detail for you on when and if potentially criminal admissions during civil trials can be used in criminal courts. It's my understanding that if you admit to criminal conduct as part of a civil trial, the state cannot turn around and prosecute you using your statements during the civil trial. But Mark would know that better than me. --- The system is intended to avoid exploitation by the government, and it was the framers' belief that the organized exploitation of the law to oppress by the government was more detrimental than the disorganized exploitation of loopholes by criminals. hey, when I did something wrong as a kid, I was SPANKED ( and I do NOT see enough parents utilizing that option today...they have been told its abusive and may leave long lasting psycological scars, to which I say BOLLOCKS, but then again I didnt draft those types of cop outs to justify my existance...no offense Mark ) .....god forbid I was an Attourney, worse still a Judge...accountability would attain new heights....sorry, but I beleive a LOT of people get away with way too much by milking loopholes....the "fifth' is great, but FULL of weakness;s too many are aware of....no get out of jail free from me.... ...you are either out of line or not..NO grey areas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 on a lighter note it will be facinating to see how this pans out...right now I see a LOT of tap-dancing, lets get to the meat.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 (edited) hey, when I did something wrong as a kid, I was SPANKED The courts are not intended to serve as surrogate parents. The courts cannot be trusted to dispense moral guidance, nor can they be trusted to do any other thing that is incumbent on parents. the "fifth' is great, but FULL of weakness;s too many are aware of....no get out of jail free from me.... ...you are either out of line or not..NO grey areas. Okay, what would you change? And who, exactly, are 'aware' of the 'weaknesses' of the fifth amendment, and how, exactly, are they exploiting them? The fifth amendment, like the others, serves as a protection for far more innocent people, than guilty. Absent the fifth amendment, confessions can be extracted by torture (Brown v. Mississippi). Is that the kind of world you want to live in? If police have the constitutional authority to COMPEL you to speak, what, really, is held back from them? Edited January 29, 2010 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tcob Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 on a lighter note it will be facinating to see how this pans out...right now I see a LOT of tap-dancing, lets get to the meat.... I am just plain loving it . hopefully we are witnessing a history making implosion !!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 The courts are not intended to serve as surrogate parents. The courts cannot be trusted to dispense moral guidance, nor can they be trusted to do any other thing that is incumbent on parents. Okay, what would you change? And who, exactly, are 'aware' of the 'weaknesses' of the fifth amendment, and how, exactly, are they exploiting them? The fifth amendment, like the others, serves as a protection for far more innocent people, than guilty. Absent the fifth amendment, confessions can be extracted by torture (Brown v. Mississippi). Is that the kind of world you want to live in? If police have the constitutional authority to COMPEL you to speak, what, really, is held back from them? all good points, but seeing witness's to crimes being able to remain mum, and walk away scott free for fear of incriminating themselves, at least in my simplistic mind, is fundementally flawed to begin with....if they witness a henous crime and choose to sy nothing, as far as i am concerned..they are every bit as guilty as the perpertrator, and a lot more Justice would be served.....I dont know rightfully how I would change it, but some sure veiw the Justice system as a cakewalk....and if one did change it they would ultimately investigate loopholes there as well....ALL systems ultimatel are flawed i suspect, and people KNOW how to manipulate every single one...human nature i presume. Personally, if a punishment for a certain crime was known to be exceedingly severe, I am guessing someone MAY think twice ( ie hand removal in India for theft as an extreme example ) here, even if guilty we have "rights" a cell bed, food and 5 or 6 years of......anyone for a backrub....enough, i'm ranting.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 all good points, but seeing witness's to crimes being able to remain mum, and walk away scott free for fear of incriminating themselves, at least in my simplistic mind, is fundementally flawed to begin with a witness to a crime cannot refrain from giving testimony. If you witness a crime and are subpoenaed to appear at trial, you MUST say what you saw, or you will be held in contempt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 (edited) a witness to a crime cannot refrain from giving testimony. If you witness a crime and are subpoenaed to appear at trial, you MUST say what you saw, or you will be held in contempt. this is what i am talking about.......Ray Lewis On Monday, June 5 the prosecution dropped the murder and assault charges against Lewis, in return for his agreeing to plead guilty to a misdemeanor (obstruction of justice) for making false, incomplete, and misleading statements to police after his arrest, and to testify against his codefendants. Lewis was given one year's probation, during which he was to continue to be employed; ordered … easy out no....not exactly pleading the fifth, I agree, but disclosing the TRUTH and then getting a plea bargain.....same MO in my mind, just legally written differently.... Edited January 29, 2010 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 a witness to a crime cannot refrain from giving testimony. If you witness a crime and are subpoenaed to appear at trial, you MUST say what you saw, or you will be held in contempt. I will be the first to admit i do not know the full ins and outs....I just witness time and again hand smacks....that hand smack should be hooked up to 240 Volts....sure would make people think twice....back on topic, so you are saying that if these ex Yoda execs are forced to testify, that if they did sign a gag order, that they CANNOT plead the 5th?......man, I'm on the conspiracy train today...apologies.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 this is what i am talking about.......Ray Lewis On Monday, June 5 the prosecution dropped the murder and assault charges against Lewis, in return for his agreeing to plead guilty to a misdemeanor (obstruction of justice) for making false, incomplete, and misleading statements to police after his arrest, and to testify against his codefendants. Lewis was given one year's probation, during which he was to continue to be employed; ordered … easy out no....not exactly pleading the fifth, I agree, but disclosing the TRUTH and then getting a plea bargain.....same MO in my mind, just legally written differently.... Okay, the Ray Lewis mess: - nobody really knows what happened there, and if Ray Lewis paid someone else to take the fall for him, well, that would've happened no matter what. But, let's assume that Ray was not involved in that murder, except as a bystander: It is a somewhat questionable police tactic to arraign everyone on the scene of a murder on probable cause that they were involved in the murder. This usually happens when multiple witnesses give conflicting statements. The police then 'sit' on all the suspects until they get one of them to break and incriminate the others. That's what apparently happened in the Ray Lewis case: Police couldn't get a clear picture of what happened there, and got no useful information from the witnesses, so they were, collectively, arrested and charged. Eventually what passes for the 'truth' came out and Lewis--as well as (I believe) other witnesses--plead guilty to obstruction of justice (it IS a crime to lie to a police officer or to the court) because they had lied to and misled the police. Therefore, (assuming Lewis was simply a bystander), Lewis plead to a crime for lying to the police when, had he cooperated, he would've gotten off without legal consequences. ---- And, as I said before: you cannot plead the fifth in a civil matter. Further, the term 'gag order' refers to a court's order restraining the principals in a trial from speaking to the public about the case. As far as confidentiality agreements attached to out-of-court settlements and sealed records, those records can be kept under seal. Where trade secrets and other matters are involved, the court can seal testimony. A prior confidentiality agreement cannot be invoked to prevent testimony, it can however, be used to put testimony under seal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 I will be the first to admit i do not know the full ins and outs....I just witness time and again hand smacks....that hand smack should be hooked up to 240 Volts....sure would make people think twice....back on topic, so you are saying that if these ex Yoda execs are forced to testify, that if they did sign a gag order, that they CANNOT plead the 5th?......man, I'm on the conspiracy train today...apologies.... The US imprisons more people per capita than any other developed nation. You get upset about 'hand slaps', well, consider the size and the scope of the US. It is the third largest country by land area and the third largest country by population. The GDP of the country is larger than the next four countries combined. The larger an organization is, the less efficiently it is run, as a general rule. The US is by no means immune from that rule. It is a staggeringly large and incredibly wealthy place that, in comparison with smaller and more homogeneous places, has many obvious drawbacks. It is not a flaw of the Bill of Rights itself that the administration of justice is often faulty, it is rather, the cost of 'success'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 Okay, the Ray Lewis mess: - nobody really knows what happened there, and if Ray Lewis paid someone else to take the fall for him, well, that would've happened no matter what. But, let's assume that Ray was not involved in that murder, except as a bystander: It is a somewhat questionable police tactic to arraign everyone on the scene of a murder on probable cause that they were involved in the murder. This usually happens when multiple witnesses give conflicting statements. The police then 'sit' on all the suspects until they get one of them to break and incriminate the others. That's what apparently happened in the Ray Lewis case: Police couldn't get a clear picture of what happened there, and got no useful information from the witnesses, so they were, collectively, arrested and charged. Eventually what passes for the 'truth' came out and Lewis--as well as (I believe) other witnesses--plead guilty to obstruction of justice (it IS a crime to lie to a police officer or to the court) because they had lied to and misled the police. Therefore, (assuming Lewis was simply a bystander), Lewis plead to a crime for lying to the police when, had he cooperated, he would've gotten off without legal consequences. ---- And, as I said before: you cannot plead the fifth in a civil matter. Further, the term 'gag order' refers to a court's order restraining the principals in a trial from speaking to the public about the case. As far as confidentiality agreements attached to out-of-court settlements and sealed records, those records can be kept under seal. Where trade secrets and other matters are involved, the court can seal testimony. A prior confidentiality agreement cannot be invoked to prevent testimony, it can however, be used to put testimony under seal. sorry if I am releasing angst out my backside...just seems to me that there are far to many ways to avoid telling the truth....fact is Ray Lewis for instance knows EXACTLY what happened that night, and he will die knowing the actual details, and really got away with one....as for gag order, well at least you knew I was pertaining to confidentiallity, and theres another issue I have....those records can be kept under seal.....thus some of the payoffs we see.....in a nutshell, moyths are paid to be kept shut....example...a certain Mr Bryant amoungst a miriad of others.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 The US imprisons more people per capita than any other developed nation. You get upset about 'hand slaps', well, consider the size and the scope of the US. It is the third largest country by land area and the third largest country by population. The GDP of the country is larger than the next four countries combined. The larger an organization is, the less efficiently it is run, as a general rule. The US is by no means immune from that rule. It is a staggeringly large and incredibly wealthy place that, in comparison with smaller and more homogeneous places, has many obvious drawbacks. It is not a flaw of the Bill of Rights itself that the administration of justice is often faulty, it is rather, the cost of 'success'. agreed...with more people comes more crime....increase the intensity of the hand slaps right now at least using a feather duster embodes NO fear from some to abuse the system....and theres ALWAYS a hungry attourney in the background jumping at the chance....too many "rights" leads to too much litigation, and loopholes abound...and you are correct, it may be a reflection of a LARGE population.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 increase the intensity of the hand slaps right now The US already punishes criminals far more severely than any other developed nation. As I recall, it's the only developed nation that still employs the death penalty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 Ray Lewis for instance knows EXACTLY what happened that night Lewis testified against Oakley & Sweeting. It's not his fault they were acquitted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 The US already punishes criminals far more severely than any other developed nation. As I recall, it's the only developed nation that still employs the death penalty. not sure I agree, but then again I cant compare with anything except my homeland which has a population of 3 million and so....and then theres ireland, and trust me, you DO NOT want to be caught doing anything too shakey there.....course the punishment isnt exactly legal, but its swift and brutal.... As for the Death penalty...it needs to be re phrased to Delayed Termination....sidenote :imagine how the 911 plotters would have been treated in their own countries if roles were reversed.....theres a reason they have suicide bombers....nothing left to punish..they probably are more fearful of the repercussions of being caught if the bomb does NOT go off.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 Lewis testified against Oakley & Sweeting. It's not his fault they were acquitted. he knew what happened, lied through his ass, never disclosed the truth and was REWARDED with a plea bargain...utter BS in my books....HE should also be behind bars... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 (edited) hell, i sound like Judge Judy with bad cramps, bad hangover, that just found out her shows been cancelled....MEAN is an understatement...hell add in menopause Edited January 29, 2010 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 (edited) :imagine how the 911 plotters would have been treated in their own countries if roles were reversed..... Yeah. But would you rather live in Taliban Afghanistan or the US? he knew what happened, lied through his ass, never disclosed the truth and was REWARDED with a plea bargain...utter BS in my books....HE should also be behind bars... Okay, you don't know he lied. Maybe half a dozen people know if he lied or not, and if he didn't commit murder, he wasn't rewarded with a plea bargain, he got stuck with a criminal conviction when he could've gotten off with nothing had he told the truth from the beginning. Edited January 29, 2010 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 Yeah. But would you rather live in Taliban Afghanistan or the US? Okay, you don't know he lied. Maybe half a dozen people know if he lied or not, and if he didn't commit murder, he wasn't rewarded with a plea bargain, he got stuck with a criminal conviction when he could've gotten off with nothing had he told the truth from the beginning. IMO he lied like low fog...hey maybe we could send criminals to Afghanistan for sentencing...hmmmmm.....lol..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 Yeah. But would you rather live in Taliban Afghanistan or the US? Okay, you don't know he lied. Maybe half a dozen people know if he lied or not, and if he didn't commit murder, he wasn't rewarded with a plea bargain, he got stuck with a criminal conviction when he could've gotten off with nothing had he told the truth from the beginning. so did Kobe lie? Micahel Jackson....OJ ?......seems anyones take on reality is but an opinion...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
01FOCI Posted January 29, 2010 Share Posted January 29, 2010 UPDATE!!!! UPDATE!!!! Toyota sends new gas pedals to plants, not dealers!!! http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100129/ap_on_bi_ge/toyota_recall This just keeps getting better and better! Screw the current customer we want to start building new ones first! This so SCREAMS profits, profits, profits! Toyota! Oh What a feeling! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 UPDATE!!!! UPDATE!!!! Toyota sends new gas pedals to plants, not dealers!!! http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100129/ap_on_bi_ge/toyota_recall This just keeps getting better and better! Screw the current customer we want to start building new ones first! This so SCREAMS profits, profits, profits! Toyota! Oh What a feeling! they are going to need him for the lawsuits that will follow,,, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
01FOCI Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 More good news! “Truly, we think of our customers as a priority and we guarantee their safety,” Mr. Toyoda said. He was seen driving off in a black Audi, according to ABC News. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/30/business/30toyota.html?adxnnl=1&partner=yahoofinance&adxnnlx=1264809695-+42Pw7qN5IK4IjGTqGq6Dw You just can't make this stuff up! CRASH AND BURN TOYOTA!!!! No pun intended, as I do not want to see any innocent ill informed/smug/arrogant Toyota owners die. Where are all the toyo apologists in this place, its not fun without them.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.