thatguyoverthere wrote: ↑Thu Feb 28, 2019 9:28 pmFrom the referenced article:philip964 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 28, 2019 7:48 pmhttps://news.yahoo.com/hearing-ex-minne ... 48527.html
Evidence issue of ex police officer refusing to testify.So we have a right not to speak, but if we exercise that right, our silence can be used against us. I believe that this defendant needs to be held accountable for his action of killing an innocent person, but this tactic of trying to use a person's silence against them by a prosecutor is troubling to me."Prosecutors say investigators asked to arrange for a voluntary interview with Noor and that he declined through his attorney.
Defense attorneys say prosecutors aren't allowed to use that against Noor in court because he has a constitutional right not to make any self-incriminating statements.
But prosecutors argue that they can use a defendant's pre-arrest silence if the defendant was under no government-imposed compulsion to speak.
"In sum, the defendant had a choice on whether to tell his side of the story during a voluntary interview in a non-coercive setting," prosecutor Amy Sweasy wrote. "His decision not to do so is relevant."
While they can use anything you say against you, the Fifth amendment protects you from being forced to provide testimony against yourself. Conversely, using your right to refuse to give statements, is also protected. It sounds like they are trying to do an end around on the Fifth amendment.
This guy needs to be prosecuted, in my opinion, but not at the expense of Constitutional rights. If they are able to do that, in this case, then it can be done to anyone. JMHO