Amendment 5: Protection against self-incrimination, double jeopardy, protection of due process and right to a grand jury
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 offence 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 5th Amendment protects us from being stripped of our liberties, unless through the due process of law. We cannot be handcuffed or locked up based on the whim of an individual working for the security of the government. We must be tried through the judicial system prior to being placed under arrest. This is extremely important to keep the government responsible in managing it's power. We want the citizens to feel in control, not imprisoned, or subjected to unjust imprisonment.
This dramatic interpretation of the 5th Amendment shows how questioning can be used in circumstances where the accused can refuse to answer questions deemed at convicting them or admitting that they are guilt for said crimes. We are innocent until proven guilty and this protects us from rending ourselves guilt. The judicial system will examine the facts to determine a final solution.
This video explains the repercussions of admitting guilt whether the person is guilt or not. This can even have an innocent person talked into admitting guilt based on questions guiding toward answers the law enforcement want to submit into court. There are cases where the innocent plead guilty and were convicted as such when they were, in fact, innocent. The best thing to do whether guilt or not is to not say anything at all, since it can lead to consequences which are unjust.
This dramatic interpretation of the 5th Amendment shows how questioning can be used in circumstances where the accused can refuse to answer questions deemed at convicting them or admitting that they are guilt for said crimes. We are innocent until proven guilty and this protects us from rending ourselves guilt. The judicial system will examine the facts to determine a final solution.
This video explains the repercussions of admitting guilt whether the person is guilt or not. This can even have an innocent person talked into admitting guilt based on questions guiding toward answers the law enforcement want to submit into court. There are cases where the innocent plead guilty and were convicted as such when they were, in fact, innocent. The best thing to do whether guilt or not is to not say anything at all, since it can lead to consequences which are unjust.
Comments
Post a Comment