Wildstein takes the 5th
David Wildstein invokes his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and refused to answer questions before a state Assembly committee investigating the lanes closures at the GWB.
By: NorthJersey
Read the original here:
Wildstein takes the 5th - Video
Fifth Amendment: Protection against abuse of government authorityWhat is the Fifth Amendment?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 offense 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 compensationThe Fifth Amendment Defined:The Fifth Amendment stems from English Common Law and traces back to the Magna Carta in 1215.The Fifth Amendment is a part of the Bill of Rights, which are the first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution and the framework to elucidate upon the freedoms of the individual. The Bill of Rights were proposed and sent to the states by the first session of the First Congress. They were later ratified on December 15, 1791.The first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution were introduced by James Madison as a series of legislative articles and came into effect as Constitutional Amendments following the process of ratification by three-fourths of the States on December 15, 1791.Stipulations of the 5th Amendment:The Fifth Amendment is asserted in any proceeding, whether civil, criminal, administrative, judicial, investigatory, or adjudicatory. The Fifth Amendment protects against all disclosures where the witness reasonably believes the evidence can be used in a criminal prosecution and can lead to the spawning of other evidence that might be used against the individual.The Fifth Amendment guarantees an American individual the right to trial by Grand Jury for specific crimes, the right not to be tried and subsequently punished more than once for the same crime, the right to be tried with only due process of the law and the right to be awarded fair compensation for any property seized by the government for public use.The Fifth Amendment also guarantees the individual the right to refrain from self-incrimination by pleading the fifth to any questions or inquiries that may give way to an additional punishment or the notion of a guilty plea.State Timeline for Ratification of the Bill of RightsNew Jersey:November 20, 1789; rejected article IIMaryland:December 19, 1789; approved allNorth Carolina:December 22, 1789; approved allSouth Carolina: January 19, 1790; approved allNew Hampshire: January 25, 1790; rejected article IIDelaware: January 28, 1790; rejected article INew York: February 27, 1790; rejected article IIPennsylvania: March 10, 1790; rejected article IIRhode Island: June 7, 1790; rejected article IIVermont: November 3, 1791; approved allVirginia: December 15, 1791; approved all
Fifth Amendment: Protection against abuse of government authorityWhat is the Fifth Amendment? 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 offense 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
The Fifth Amendment Defined:
The Fifth Amendment stems from English Common Law and traces back to the Magna Carta in 1215.
The Fifth Amendment is a part of the Bill of Rights, which are the first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution and the framework to elucidate upon the freedoms of the individual. The Bill of Rights were proposed and sent to the states by the first session of the First Congress. They were later ratified on December 15, 1791.
The first 10 Amendments to the United States Constitution were introduced by James Madison as a series of legislative articles and came into effect as Constitutional Amendments following the process of ratification by three-fourths of the States on December 15, 1791.Stipulations of the 5th Amendment: The Fifth Amendment is asserted in any proceeding, whether civil, criminal, administrative, judicial, investigatory, or adjudicatory. The Fifth Amendment protects against all disclosures where the witness reasonably believes the evidence can be used in a criminal prosecution and can lead to the spawning of other evidence that might be used against the individual.
The Fifth Amendment guarantees an American individual the right to trial by Grand Jury for specific crimes, the right not to be tried and subsequently punished more than once for the same crime, the right to be tried with only due process of the law and the right to be awarded fair compensation for any property seized by the government for public use.
The Fifth Amendment also guarantees the individual the right to refrain from self-incrimination by pleading the fifth to any questions or inquiries that may give way to an additional punishment or the notion of a guilty plea.State Timeline for Ratification of the Bill of Rights New Jersey:November 20, 1789; rejected article II
Maryland:December 19, 1789; approved all
North Carolina:December 22, 1789; approved all
Read the rest here:
5th Amendment - Laws.com
From News Tribune staff and AP wire reports
Thursday, August 28, 2014
A Missouri ballot measure that would allow allegations of past actions to be used against people facing child sexual abuse charges could lead to more wrongful convictions of the falsely accused, a prominent defense attorney said Wednesday.
The proposed constitutional amendment is backed by prosecutors, sheriffs and police chiefs groups.
It would allow past criminal acts even alleged crimes that didnt result in convictions to be used to corroborate victim testimony or demonstrate a defendants propensity to commit such crimes when people face sex-related charges involving victims younger than 18. However, the evidences admissibility is at the judges discretion, meaning if the judge doesnt think it is relevant to the matter being tried then it can not be used.
Currently the previous acts of defendants cannot be presented as evidence to a jury unless they waive their Fifth Amendment rights and testify. The past allegations can also be taken into consideration by judges during sentencing hearings after the defendant has been found guilty.
If approved by Missouri voters in November, Constitutional Amendment 2 could make it more difficult for defendants to persuade juries and judges of their innocence, said Kim Benjamin, a Belton attorney who is the past president of the Missouri Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
Youre now defending your entire life, your entire reputation, rather than this one act, she said. It causes a tremendous risk for more people to be wrongly convicted.
One of Benjamins most prominent clients was Burrell Mohler Sr., the patriarch of a western Missouri family who was accused along with his four sons of sexually abusing young relatives over many years. The charges ultimately were dropped in March 2012, after Mohler had spent more than two years in jail while awaiting trial.
The proposal, which was referred to the ballot by the Legislature in 2013, is a backlash against a December 2007 Missouri Supreme Court decision of State v. Ellison that struck down a state law allowing evidence of past sexual crimes to be used against people facing new sex-related charges involving victims younger than 14. Before Ellison, the Legislature had twice tried to establish legislation that would make the states statues regarding these issues mimic federal law, but both attempts were deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
See the original post here:
Sexual abuse measure could lead to wrongful convictions, attorneys say
Two Spokane County building employees invoked their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination this week in a case that accuses the county of improperly back-dating documents to allow construction of a gas station where a state board ruled it was notallowed.
The county workers testified Monday during an appeal before the county hearing examiner of a building permit application for a convenience store and gas station at Argonne and Bigelow Gulchroads.
Building Director Randy Vissia, one of the two county employees who invoked his Fifth Amendment rights, said he was advised to not answer questions by a county attorney
You have viewed 20 free articles or blogs allowed within a 30-day period. FREE registration is now required for uninterrupted access.
S-R Media, The Spokesman-Review and Spokesman.com are happy to assist you. Contact Customer Service by email or call 800-338-8801
Two Spokane County building employees invoked their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination this week in a case that accuses the county of improperly back-dating documents to allow construction of a gas station where a state board ruled it was notallowed.
The county workers testified Monday during an appeal before the county hearing examiner of a building permit application for a convenience store and gas station at Argonne and Bigelow Gulchroads.
Building Director Randy Vissia, one of the two county employees who invoked his Fifth Amendment rights, said he was advised to not answer questions by a county attorney even though, according to Vissia, his employee, Julie Shatto, had done nothing wrong in approving the permit application as completed. Shatto also declined to answer questions at the hearing involving the date that the application was certified ascomplete.
Property owner and developer Stephen Smart, who was at the hearing to defend his project, said the appellant attorneys were acting like attackdogs.
Local residents and neighborhood groups appealed the county decision to let the project proceed, arguing the project was flawed on several grounds, including environmental review and applicationcompleteness.
Go here to read the rest:
Spokane County workers use Fifth Amendment in back-dating case - Thu, 22 May 2014 PST
OK, just to be clear: Two Spokane County planning officials pleaded the Fifth Amendment you know, the one where you cant be compelled to give criminal evidence against yourself when asked in a public hearing if they had falsified planning documents to boost a new gas station over a legalhurdle.
But they didnt, were told, do anythingwrong.
Spokane Countys unofficial policy of approving developments and then hustling to get them grandfathered in before theyre undone took a turn this week that even the most conspiratorial-minded of critics might not have foreseen. A landowner
You have viewed 20 free articles or blogs allowed within a 30-day period. FREE registration is now required for uninterrupted access.
S-R Media, The Spokesman-Review and Spokesman.com are happy to assist you. Contact Customer Service by email or call 800-338-8801
OK, just to be clear: Two Spokane County planning officials pleaded the Fifth Amendment you know, the one where you cant be compelled to give criminal evidence against yourself when asked in a public hearing if they had falsified planning documents to boost a new gas station over a legalhurdle.
But they didnt, were told, do anythingwrong.
Spokane Countys unofficial policy of approving developments and then hustling to get them grandfathered in before theyre undone took a turn this week that even the most conspiratorial-minded of critics might not have foreseen. A landowner wants to build a gas station at Argonne and Bigelow Gulch roads, on land the county added to its growth management boundary last July. Unfortunately, the state invalidated that expansion last November, also invalidating the zoning under which the projects permit wasapproved.
If the application was completed between July and November, it would be considered vested and grandfathered in. The seeming abuse of vesting is the loophole the City Council tried to close in March undermined by Mayor David Condons veto because it essentially allows developers to take a side route around land-use laws with the county commissionshelp.
The latest allegation, if true, would amount to a whole new level of chicanery. The projects first Determination of Completeness was signed Jan. 27 of this year. Too late for vesting. Well after too late. And yet the project was moving forward with the countys blessing. Rick Eichstaedt, the attorney for neighbors challenging the project, inquired about this discrepancy. Within a couple of days, a new permitappeared.
Excerpt from:
Shawn Vestal: County permit clerical mishap raises eyebrows - Fri, 23 May 2014 PST