3 ms·

I hate to piggyback on the top comment, but could somebody explain the 5th Amendment and its implications here. I'm not a lawyer, nor am I from the USA. I've h

I hate to piggyback on the top comment, but could somebody explain the 5th Amendment and its implications here. I'm not a lawyer, nor am I from the USA. I've heard of the fifth, but never fully understood it in scenarios like this.

mschwar99 10y ago
The 5th covers several rights of a person accused of a crime. In this context they are referring to the amendment's protection against self incrimination: "nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." A person has the right to decline to answer questions if they believe that their answers could be used against them as evidence of a criminal act. This particular proceeding is civil rather than criminal so its outcome can't result in any criminal convictions. However, if he were later to be charged with a crime and tried in a criminal court any testimony he gave in this civil action could be used against him as evidence in the criminal trial.
KallDrexx 10y ago
When you are being questioned by authorities, even if you are 100% clear/not guilty in the matter the simple fact of the matter is that it is very unlikely that you will be 100% accurate in your testimony to the authorities. Little details (even when correct) can be twisted by the authorities who have an incentive to get a conviction. So the fifth amendment was created to give legal protection to individuals who do not wish to testify or talk with authorities themselves and allow them to utilize an impartial 3rd party lawyer to manage the conversation flow. A jury in a criminal case is not supposed to hold any weight to someone taking a fifth amendment plea to not talk (since it's a provision really meant to protect the innocent) but with human nature that's unfortunately not the case. However, since this is a civil case I don't know if the legal system has to be neutral in a Fifth amendment plea. If not that would help Waymo's case, especially since Waymo does have evidence that he downloaded these documents. So Him taking the fifth is just to make sure he doesn't do anything himself that will spawn a criminal conviction later. (IANAL)
- dx034 10y ago
  The judge specifically says that the 5th is only valid in criminal cases and leads to adverse inference in a civil case like this. Meaning the judge is very well able to assume that files ended up at Uber if they don't show enough effort to produce proof. So the fact that the employee uses the 5th hurts Uber significantly in this case.

mschwar99 10y ago

The 5th covers several rights of a person accused of a crime. In this context they are referring to the amendment's protection against self incrimination: "nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." A person has the right to decline to answer questions if they believe that their answers could be used against them as evidence of a criminal act. This particular proceeding is civil rather than criminal so its outcome can't result in any criminal convictions. However, if he were later to be charged with a crime and tried in a criminal court any testimony he gave in this civil action could be used against him as evidence in the criminal trial.

KallDrexx 10y ago

When you are being questioned by authorities, even if you are 100% clear/not guilty in the matter the simple fact of the matter is that it is very unlikely that you will be 100% accurate in your testimony to the authorities. Little details (even when correct) can be twisted by the authorities who have an incentive to get a conviction. So the fifth amendment was created to give legal protection to individuals who do not wish to testify or talk with authorities themselves and allow them to utilize an impartial 3rd party lawyer to manage the conversation flow. A jury in a criminal case is not supposed to hold any weight to someone taking a fifth amendment plea to not talk (since it's a provision really meant to protect the innocent) but with human nature that's unfortunately not the case. However, since this is a civil case I don't know if the legal system has to be neutral in a Fifth amendment plea. If not that would help Waymo's case, especially since Waymo does have evidence that he downloaded these documents. So Him taking the fifth is just to make sure he doesn't do anything himself that will spawn a criminal conviction later. (IANAL)

dx034 10y ago
The judge specifically says that the 5th is only valid in criminal cases and leads to adverse inference in a civil case like this. Meaning the judge is very well able to assume that files ended up at Uber if they don't show enough effort to produce proof. So the fact that the employee uses the 5th hurts Uber significantly in this case.