3 ms·
IANAL either but that is also how I read it. I don't really find this all that disturbing. He chose to talk and then chose to not answer that specific question.
by jack-r-abbit 13y ago
IANAL either but that is also how I read it. I don't really find this all that disturbing. He chose to talk and then chose to not answer that specific question. Plus, as was pointed out in the article and by another poster here, the ballistics confirmed a match to the gun. So there was more at play in the court room than just his silence.
- gradys 13y agoHe probably would have been convicted anyway, but Supreme Court rulings set precedent for future cases.