3 ms·

>The 5th amendment gives people the right to refuse to testify, as a witness, in a way that might incriminate oneself. I'm not American, but I'm pretty sure th

>The 5th amendment gives people the right to refuse to testify, as a witness, in a way that might incriminate oneself. I'm not American, but I'm pretty sure the fifth amendment applies to any and all self incriminating statements that can be used to support a criminal charge against you. This is the entire reason police advise you of these exact same rights at the moment of arrest. By your explanation, anything you say to a police officer or other figure of authority (in this case the school) that leads to criminal prosecution is fair game. That simply isn't the case. Entire context: nor shall (a person) 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; Witness is in reference to the general action; not just sitting on a stand.

rayiner 13y ago
> I'm not American, but I'm pretty sure the fifth amendment applies to any and all self incriminating statements that can be used to support a criminal charge against you. The core of the rule is narrower than that: http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fifth_amendment http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fifth_amendment ("The Fifth Amendment protects criminal defendants from having to testify if they may incriminate themselves through the testimony.") It has been broadened beyond that, ("In the landmark Miranda v. Arizona ruling, the United States Supreme Court extended the Fifth Amendment protections to encompass any situation outside of the courtroom that involves the curtailment of personal freedom"), but note that Miranda itself is inapplicable because the "custody" element is missing. I can't find any case law on the subject, but there is an old law review article that discusses some of the issues: http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2092&context=wmlr http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=20.... Even within the framework of the article, which argues in favor of students having 5th amendment rights in general, it's hard to see how a survey aimed at gathering information for psychological evaluation would implicate the 5th amendment. The most likely answer seems to be that it's permissible so long as the student retains the right to invoke the 5th in any criminal action against him.
- run4yourlives 13y ago
  From your link: The term "coercion" is an elastic word that may mean different things in different settings. In the public school context, for example, an administrator may suspect a student of wrongdoing" and threaten to impose a penalty unless the student makes a statement. The administrator may threaten to suspend or expel the student, to call the police, or to impose a less "severe" penalty such as keeping the student after school. At some point, these threats become coercion, thereby implicating the fifth amendment Considering what is happening to the teacher, I'm sure any reasonably skilled lawyer would be able to make the case that such an atmosphere of coercion does in fact exist in this particular district.

rayiner 13y ago

> I'm not American, but I'm pretty sure the fifth amendment applies to any and all self incriminating statements that can be used to support a criminal charge against you. The core of the rule is narrower than that: http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fifth_amendment http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fifth_amendment ("The Fifth Amendment protects criminal defendants from having to testify if they may incriminate themselves through the testimony.") It has been broadened beyond that, ("In the landmark Miranda v. Arizona ruling, the United States Supreme Court extended the Fifth Amendment protections to encompass any situation outside of the courtroom that involves the curtailment of personal freedom"), but note that Miranda itself is inapplicable because the "custody" element is missing. I can't find any case law on the subject, but there is an old law review article that discusses some of the issues: http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2092&context=wmlr http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=20.... Even within the framework of the article, which argues in favor of students having 5th amendment rights in general, it's hard to see how a survey aimed at gathering information for psychological evaluation would implicate the 5th amendment. The most likely answer seems to be that it's permissible so long as the student retains the right to invoke the 5th in any criminal action against him.

run4yourlives 13y ago
From your link: The term "coercion" is an elastic word that may mean different things in different settings. In the public school context, for example, an administrator may suspect a student of wrongdoing" and threaten to impose a penalty unless the student makes a statement. The administrator may threaten to suspend or expel the student, to call the police, or to impose a less "severe" penalty such as keeping the student after school. At some point, these threats become coercion, thereby implicating the fifth amendment Considering what is happening to the teacher, I'm sure any reasonably skilled lawyer would be able to make the case that such an atmosphere of coercion does in fact exist in this particular district.