quote:
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

It seems that 5th is intended, quite expressly by its language, to apply only to criminal court proceedings. Since this is a Congressional investigation, not a criminal trial, does she even have the right to refuse to answer? She can't be convicted of any crime if she testifies before Congress; therefore, can she even take the 5th?

Furthermore, if she makes an immunity deal with Congress and then reneges by taking the 5th, wouldn't she then be open to a lawsuit, charges, or contempt of Congress?

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by tLSU

Member since Oct 2007

8618 posts

Posted on 3/5/14 at 2:44 pm to bluestem75

The Supreme Court ruled that the privilege applies to any legal proceeding....whether the witness is in a federal court or state court and in both civil and criminal proceedings. It was first invoked in Congressional proceedings back in the 1960's.

This post was edited on 3/5/14 at 2:45 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by FalseProphet

Mecca

Member since Dec 2011

11706 posts

Posted on 3/5/14 at 2:45 pm to tLSU

Actually earlier than that. You're correct that it applies to every type of proceeding whether in state or federal court.

3 ...

Report Post

Posted by tLSU

Member since Oct 2007

8618 posts

Posted on 3/5/14 at 2:46 pm to FalseProphet

It was either the 50's or 60's, whenever the hearings for the red scare were actually conducted.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by SpidermanTUba

my house

Member since May 2004

36128 posts

Posted on 3/5/14 at 2:47 pm to FalseProphet

Except I'm pretty sure if you've been given immunity from a particular charge you are not allowed to invoke the 5th - since you aren't actually in danger of prosecution for revealing evidence of a crime you are immune from.

This post was edited on 3/5/14 at 2:48 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Y.A. Tittle

Member since Sep 2003

101225 posts

Posted on 3/5/14 at 2:48 pm to FalseProphet

Carlos Marcello

quote:
On March 24, 1959, Marcello appeared before a United States Senate committee investigating organized crime. Serving as Chief Counsel to the committee was Robert F. Kennedy; his brother, Senator John F. Kennedy, was a member of the committee. In response to committee questioning, Marcello invoked the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, in refusing to answer any questions relating to his background, activities and associates.

This post was edited on 3/5/14 at 2:50 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by FalseProphet

Mecca

Member since Dec 2011

11706 posts

Posted on 3/5/14 at 2:57 pm to SpidermanTUba

quote:
Except I'm pretty sure if you've been given immunity from a particular charge you are not allowed to invoke the 5th - since you aren't actually in danger of prosecution for revealing evidence of a crime you are immune from.

I think you're correct. 18 U.S.C. 6002 says that if an order of immunity is issued then the right to invoke the Fifth is removed, but there are special provisions in 18 U.S.C. 6005 dealing specifically with immunity before Congress. Congress has to jump through certain hoops, even if immunity is given, before they can compel the testimony over the invocation.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by NC_Tigah