Why is pleading the fifth considered a right? What is there to gain for society when accused criminals can refuse to cooperate? If they are guilty, why would you be able to basically say "I committed a crime but haha you can't catch me." I usually understand why all these rights in the US constitution exist but this one baffles me.
Why is pleading the fifth considered a right...
Anthony Bennett
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
Ian Roberts
>accused
but not guilty (yet)
Carter Collins
capitalism, obviously.
Nicholas Scott
Why the 5th is a blessing: youtube.com
The government has thousands upon thousands of ways to accuse you.
You have only 1 way to defend yourself: STFU
Michael Gutierrez
>"I committed a crime but haha you can't catch me."
That is explicitly not what it means.
Jordan Long
>If they are guilty,
Yeah! If they're guilty, why have a trial at all, amiright?
Ryan Lee
Because there's nothing to force you to say anything otherwise.
Zachary Cox
This. Just hang them all and be done with it why bother having a farce of a trial.
Nicholas Scott
It's meant to protect citizens from the state compelling the citizens to declare themselves guilty. False confessions happen, and the police do their best to get you to confess, directly or not, to anything at all. It has to be explicitly invoked btw, you can't just "not cooperate".
Plus pic related
Justin Bell
>accused
>criminals
pick one, you third world shitter
Zachary Hernandez
Exactly, this is why the US police now routinely perform extra-judicial executions of black suspects instead of arresting them.
Sebastian Ortiz
>If they are guilty
Are you retarded? If you start out from this assumption why have trials at all?
Chase Miller
>It has to be explicitly invoked
Uhm, no.
The right to remain silent and all that
Lincoln Flores
You have the right to not incriminate yourself
Elijah Cox
Are you sure?
Adam Wright
He's confusing the 5th amendment's applications in court with the right to remain silent when placed under arrest.
Andrew Evans
I don't even.
This post hurts my brain. OP is no way older than 16 years old.
Benjamin Roberts
Yes.
Even without explicitly asserting Miranda you still have the right to stand mute. Only law enforcement does not have to take your silence as an assertion of Miranda, as per Berghuis v. Thomkins.
And btw, remaining silent untill legal counsil is present is ALWAYS the best strategy.
Jaxon Howard
what did he do?
Hudson Evans
Look at this fucking bootlicker
Owen Rogers
The framers of the Constitution were literal criminals.
Nolan Green
Because unlike Europoors we give our citizens the chance to defend themselves whether they are guilty or not.
Nathan Walker
>accused criminals
If they have only been accused then they aren't criminals.
Sebastian Ramirez
You do realize that pleading the 5th has more than just a gotcha for people being accused of crimes, right? And that the jurisdiction for 5th amendment protection goes outside of the U.S. itself?
Say we have a businessman being called to testify in a civil suit involving his business. He travels a lot to some third world shithole, where practice of his branch of Christianity is illegal. Our witness meets someone at his church, which is relevant to the case somehow. He is allowed to refuse to testify to that effect because it can get him in trouble in shitholeistan.
Austin Bennett
In Old English Law, an accused who refused to testify would be strapped to a board, weighted with stones, which would be piled on until the accused died. All the Bill of Rights does is stop the practice.
This quite famously happened to Giles Cory who was accused of witchcraft. He chose death to prevent his estate from being seized by the court. Death was tantamount to exoneration.
The concept still exists in US common law, in abatement ex initio, which Aaron Hernandez used to vacate his crimes, since after committing suicide the case reverted to its initial state, that of innocence.
In Roman times this is the part where one falls on his sword.
Jaxon Morales
t. Lord North
Ethan Scott
It's in the constitution that you can't be coerced, or otherwise forced, to testify against yourself
Cameron Scott
In the case of Yung Shkreli he had no reason to be there to begin with.
Carson Harris
>why can't I be coerced into testifying against myself
Just be glad smarter people than you made these laws with your best interests at heart.
Joshua Watson
I didn't really realize that the right not to testify against yourself was an extension of the right to remain silent. I always thought it was another right entirely, and I understood the right not to remain silent. I guess the wording confused me and I was wondering why it would be separate.
Jonathan Cox
Abused like shit