this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
1271 points (98.4% liked)
Memes
45581 readers
1248 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
“You’re in contempt of court. You have been fined $x and continued refusal to swear the oath will land you in prison until you do. Jackass.”
That’s what the judge does.
It's really a process of letting the subpoenaed know that they either tell the truth, lie and face perjury charges, or refuse and face contempt or court charges. The latter can seemingly land you in jail in perpetuity. Because fuck you, I guess?
Does the "right to remain silent" still apply?
That's mostly for police. Once you're in court and ordered to testify, the person talking about germany is mostly correct. You can't be forced to self-incriminate nor testify against a spouse. Otherwise yes. Generally 99% of courts won't bother even asking the defendant to testify because self-incrimination is practically guaranteed. Usually only if the defense calls on them, which is often a bad idea.
"Please state your name"
"I can't do that without incriminating myself"
Mr. Stealsalot,
We meet again
I just talked about Germany because I didn't knew how it is in the US. Apparently it's exactly the same. Intresting comment
Only if there’s a risk at incriminating yourself, and if it’s not immediately apparent how you’d run that risk (e.g. you’re a witness that doesn’t have a direct relation to the crime at hand) you’d have to motivate how it could be incriminating.
What if you were coerced into testifying?
Then you plead the 5th. Pretty sure that's exactly what it's intended for.
You can't be forced to testify against yourself, but you can be forced to testify against others.
Exceptions are: Spouses can't be forced to testify against each other. Parents can't be forced to testify against their child and same thing vice versa.
"They can’t arrest a husband and wife for the same crime."
They can, they'll just have to find other evidence. If there's a court case with the defendants being a married couple who both refuse to testify and there's no other evidence, it's essentially the same as a court case with one defendant that's refusing to testify against themself and there's no other evidence. Both cases will result in dismissal.
The person you're replying to was quoting Arrested Development.
I was but I don't mind learning a thing or two
“I have the worst fucking attorneys.”
And therapist/lawyers don't have to testify right?
Unless they were legally obligated to report you. They can testify in regards to whatever specific topic lead to that.
i'd guess when the patient admits to have committed murder and then the therapist has to report it, right ?
https://joshuatreecounseling.us/2021/07/19/what-happens-if-i-tell-my-therapist-i-did-something-illegal/#:~:text=In%20Florida%2C%20duty%2Dto%2D,harm%20from%20a%20client%2Fpatient.
My layman's understanding is that if you say you committed murder 20 years ago, but your therapist doesn't believe you are actually a clear, present, and immediate danger to yourself or others, they don't actually have to report it. I find it hard to believe that there would be a situation where someone could admit to something like that and the therapist doesn't think they are at a reasonable likelihood to reoffend, but I guess the potential for the situation exists.
The link above is specific to Florida, but I'm sure that there are differences in law in different jurisdictions and probably even specifics at the federal level.
I am neither a lawyer nor a therapist, just a shitposter, so take all of this with a grain of salt.
Thanks, that's a huge help
But until fairly recently you could plead the 5th and they couldn't use it as proof of wrongdoing.
You still can’t use the 5th to infer anything about the defendant in a criminal case. In a civil case, the court can take a person’s refusal to answer into account.
What changed?
Some rulings that pleading the 5th can be considered cause for a warrant if not directly an admission of guilt.
The past decade or so has also weakened rights in regards to you having to plead the 5th directly, and of course the "War on Terror" led to the Supreme Court more or less saying "No, actually, torture doesn't count, plus we're going to ignore that it's been the official position of America for centuries that Constitutional rights are human rights (for a changing definition of human)."
Taken as a whole the past couple decades have severely reduced the protections the government wants to admit the 5th offers.
You mean by a court subpoena? If so then you testify or get found in contempt of court.
Or do you mean what if someone is threatened/blackmailed into giving false testimony? If that's the case then you should probably go to the police. If it's law enforcement who are coercing you then I suppose you could try to include that fact in the testimony, but there may not be much difference in that and refusing to comply with the blackmailer in the first place, in terms of your safety.
If you're coerced to lie under oath then I'd guess that still counts as perjury, but I doubt most judges would be mad at you for it; they'd shit fury all over whoever was coercing you.
You speak to your lawyer ahead of time and they discuss the issue with the judge.
If that's the best the judge can do, I feel sorry for them. And I will leave it at that.
IDK, imprisoning a person until they either comply or the trial concludes without them seems pretty good for the judge. Bad for the person subpoenaed, but it's no skin of the judge's back
I walk up to the goddamn judge and hand him my $25 dollars and say "Here's my money, now I am leaving!" And I left it at that.
How is it legal for them to just throw you in jail forever just for pissing off a judge? Why even pretend we have rights if that's how the system is going to operate?
Because other people have a right to a speedy trial as well, and if you're intentionally holding up the court's time they're going to punish you.
It's illegal to lie to the court. Even if all oaths weren't utterly worthless, one made under duress is inherently invalid. This one serves literally no purpose other than to psychologically dominate a person.
It's just a more formal affirmation. Lots of people "promise" things they have no intention of really trying. It's a grander gestire for grander consequences.
No it isn't. Oaths aren't "grand gestures," they're just silly. This one is worse than silly; it's the rough equivalent of a school bully putting you in a headlock and not letting you go until you agree to whatever bullshit he wants from you, and beating the shit out of you if you won't.
It's a "grander gesture" (quote me correctly pls) than an informal promise with a friend. Do you consider signing a lease or a mortgage to be the rough equivalent of a school bully putting you in a headlock?
No, because I can refuse to sign the lease and I won't get put in prison for that. Swearing a compulsory oath under threat of imprisonment in a sitiation you were forced to be in isn't any kind if gesture, it's just submission to coersion, nothing more, nothing less.
That doesn't give them the right to jail you indefinitely. This system lies and tells you we all have rights, but if they can just do that forever because you insulted or angered a judge, then you need to realize it is just a lie and we don't have rights. It's the same authoritarianism people fought and died to erase from the world. Judges can't be allowed to just do what they want.
By refusing to tell the truth to the court, you're basically refusing to take part in the trial. Which translates to you're refusing to take part in the justice system, yet also somehow wanting justice ... ??
The thread is talking about a dude telling a joke. It's obviously a joke. And you're defending the possibility that a judge could have someone be jailed for years over it. That in the land of the free you can be tortured on the order of a psuedo king over a joke.
No. Fuck that, and fuck you. There is nothing legitimate or defensible about that, goodbye.
They aren't jailing you indefinitely just because you angered the judge. They might give you a few days if, again, you're just being an asshole or wasting time.
I've seen a lot of "Oh, judges can't be trusted" since Trumps indictments have rolled out. I wonder why that is.
The conversation presupposes they will. Actually, that's exactly what the others were saying. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt, bro.
The legal system simply is illegitimate, and the fact that can happen is one of the Mt. Everest high pile of reasons why
the legal system fucks everyone, trumpies just don't want it to fuck their guy. It's like, welcome to the party guys lol.