4 ms·

I'm reading this book "You have the right to remain innocent" [1] And it brings up amazing cases where the system is definitely not limiting it's powers and it

I'm reading this book "You have the right to remain innocent" [1] And it brings up amazing cases where the system is definitely not limiting it's powers and it's leading to false convictions. Here's a youtube of more or less the book: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FENubmZGj8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FENubmZGj8 [1]: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/30532856-you-have-the-right-to-remain-innocent https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/30532856-you-have-the-ri... EDIT: errm actually that YT video is actually a little scant on details. The TLDR is say nothing except make an absolute demand for your 6th amendment rights (a lawyer). And don't be soft about it like "maybe I can get a lawyer?" ... say "I have a right to a lawyer and will not answer anything without first speaking to my lawyer" People might be thinking "I thought it was the 5th ?" Ironically , the same conservatives that have been trumpeting the 2nd have concurrently been undermining the 5th and now can be used against you as evidence of guilt.

lisper 5y ago
Both sides of the political spectrum cherry-pick the Constitution. Liberals hate the second amendment. Conservatives hate the ninth.
falcrist 5y ago
The content in the book you're talking about is probably better represented by Professor Duane's original viral video on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE I think he wrote that book in part because he was frustrated by the lack of nuance in his presentation and the fact that it sort of "went viral". 13 million views for a lecture about law is pretty astonishing.
- maerF0x0 5y ago
  Yes, but iirc the best advice at the time of the viral video was invoke the 5th, but it has since evolved to do not invoke the 5th. Insist on your 6th .
  - falcrist 5y ago
    There's quite a bit of nuance in that recommendation. It's also very much about how you invoke your rights.
  - cryptonector 5y ago
    Since Salinas v. Texas you cannot stay quiet. You must invoke your 5th amendment right to not speak to the police, else they can use your silence against you at trial(!). Professor Duane has a video on that topic.
    - falcrist 5y ago
      I seem to recall the correct thing to do is to ask for council.
      - cryptonector 5y ago
        That too. "I will not speak without a lawyer present" should do.
munk-a 5y ago
> Ironically , the same conservatives that have been trumpeting the 2nd have concurrently been undermining the 5th and now can be used against you as evidence of guilt. Just out of curiosity - are you possibly confusing civil vs. criminal cases? The 5th amendment does apply in civil cases to the extent that you cannot be compelled to testify - but a judge can interpret your lack of response in a negative light in a civil setting. This differs from criminal cases where the lack of testimony is not admissible nor can it be considered in determination or sentencing.
- cryptonector 5y ago
  I think GP must be referring to Scalia's vote in Salinas v. Texas, which decided that a defendant's silence can be used against them at trial unless they specifically invoked their 5th amendment right to be quiet.
  - maerF0x0 5y ago
    Most directly I am referring to Duane's advice, of which I do not know his direct source (but I'm sure it's in the book as there are extensive notes). Just thought I'd help clarify where I was coming from. That trial does seem to fit the scenario though.

lisper 5y ago

Both sides of the political spectrum cherry-pick the Constitution. Liberals hate the second amendment. Conservatives hate the ninth.

falcrist 5y ago

The content in the book you're talking about is probably better represented by Professor Duane's original viral video on the topic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE I think he wrote that book in part because he was frustrated by the lack of nuance in his presentation and the fact that it sort of "went viral". 13 million views for a lecture about law is pretty astonishing.

maerF0x0 5y ago
Yes, but iirc the best advice at the time of the viral video was invoke the 5th, but it has since evolved to do not invoke the 5th. Insist on your 6th .
- falcrist 5y ago
  There's quite a bit of nuance in that recommendation. It's also very much about how you invoke your rights.
- cryptonector 5y ago
  Since Salinas v. Texas you cannot stay quiet. You must invoke your 5th amendment right to not speak to the police, else they can use your silence against you at trial(!). Professor Duane has a video on that topic.
  - falcrist 5y ago
    I seem to recall the correct thing to do is to ask for council.
    - cryptonector 5y ago
      That too. "I will not speak without a lawyer present" should do.

munk-a 5y ago

> Ironically , the same conservatives that have been trumpeting the 2nd have concurrently been undermining the 5th and now can be used against you as evidence of guilt. Just out of curiosity - are you possibly confusing civil vs. criminal cases? The 5th amendment does apply in civil cases to the extent that you cannot be compelled to testify - but a judge can interpret your lack of response in a negative light in a civil setting. This differs from criminal cases where the lack of testimony is not admissible nor can it be considered in determination or sentencing.

cryptonector 5y ago
I think GP must be referring to Scalia's vote in Salinas v. Texas, which decided that a defendant's silence can be used against them at trial unless they specifically invoked their 5th amendment right to be quiet.
- maerF0x0 5y ago
  Most directly I am referring to Duane's advice, of which I do not know his direct source (but I'm sure it's in the book as there are extensive notes). Just thought I'd help clarify where I was coming from. That trial does seem to fit the scenario though.