- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Federal Prosecutors are now PLEADING the 5th when asked "Did you break the law"!
Posted on 5/2/24 at 11:50 am to Timeoday
Posted on 5/2/24 at 11:50 am to Timeoday
In the true letter of the law, our laws were set up directly to make the answer to these questions "NO"
If a person risks self incriminating situation and pleads the 5th, he should not be employed by the government ever again, period.
If a person risks self incriminating situation and pleads the 5th, he should not be employed by the government ever again, period.
1
Posted on 5/2/24 at 12:41 pm to Timeoday
Defund the doj, they are not in the Constitution nor needed.
Posted on 5/2/24 at 12:59 pm to ChatGPT of LA
quote:
In the true letter of the law, our laws were set up directly to make the answer to these questions "NO"
If a person risks self incriminating situation and pleads the 5th, he should not be employed by the government ever again, period.
Exactly. Besides, if you are in your "official" capacity how can you plead the 5th when the action in question was official?
Maybe it has to do with the risk of losing any kind of "immunity" that official might have.
Posted on 5/2/24 at 1:20 pm to FalseProphet
quote:
It'll generate some headlines, but those were some pretty loaded questions that should make even innocent parties invoke the Fifth.
Did you break the law? If he says, "no," and they find some obscure law that has no significance to the case, then they claim perjury. If someone asked if you've ever broken the law while doing your job duties, could you truly and confidently assert that the answer is no? Because I'm willing to bet I could find something that violated some law, even if it's something as benign as violating some internet access or usage statute.
Same thing with did you violate any constitutional rights? I can firmly believe I didn't, but who knows what some court some day would say.
So, I plead the Fifith. And any good lawyer worth his salt would tell you to do that as well.
Didn't really seem like loaded questions to me. If you're going to prosecute people and take away their freedom, then you should not have the ability to plead the 5th Amendment with regard to your official duties. You take an oath to the Constitution, if you can't be transparent about your duties and actions, then you have no business holding the authority to strip people of their freedom.
Posted on 5/2/24 at 1:21 pm to FalseProphet
Well, it’s not perjury if you objectively believed in your statement. Saying “I didn’t break the law” isn’t perjury if you broke some obscure law and legitimately had no knowledge that you were breaking that obscure law. I don’t inherently disagree with your result—it’s pretty much always smart legal advice to plead the fifth. Your reasoning is a little flawed though.
Posted on 5/2/24 at 3:37 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
I believe this happened last May. Pomerantz claimed he used his 5th Amendment rights to avoid the revealing of Grand Jury testimony, which would have been a crime.
That's horseshite at multiple levels.
First, even assuming 6(e) was applicable, THAT'S the objection you make - not 5th Amendment.
"Responding to that question would require me to violate the restrictions of F.R.Crim.P. Rule 6(e); therefore, I cannot answer."
Second, that rule does not apply to WITNESSES. Witnesses can disclose what THEY told the grand jury. So, if this was as to HIS testimony in front of the grand jury, he has no valid basis to object or refuse to answer.
Third, the questions that were asked in no way trigger any 6(e) issue. These questions specifically asked abiut HIS actions and whether those actions were illegal, a violation of rights under color of law, or unethical. Considering that grand jury proceedings do not provide immunity for any prosecutor to commit any such acts, they certainly would not be prohibited under the Rule.
Trump should immediately file a 1983 action against Pomerantz/DOJ and then use these 5th Amendment assertions for an adverse inference against him and the Department for abuse of process.
Posted on 5/2/24 at 4:37 pm to Timeoday
They, of all people, should NOT be allowed to do that.
Posted on 5/2/24 at 5:15 pm to udtiger
quote:Ya think?
I believe this happened last May. Pomerantz claimed he used his 5th Amendment rights to avoid the revealing of Grand Jury testimony, which would have been a crime.
---
That's horseshite at multiple levels.
I'm just telling you what the Piece of Sh*t claimed last year.
Posted on 5/2/24 at 5:25 pm to FalseProphet
quote:
Same thing with did you violate any constitutional rights? I can firmly believe I didn't, but who knows what some court some day would say. So, I plead the Fifith. And any good lawyer worth his salt would tell you to do that as well.
So someone investigating someone in whether they broke laws doesn’t know the laws?
That seems kind of fricked up. How can you practice law and not know the laws you or your client might break?
This post was edited on 5/2/24 at 5:34 pm
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News