- Thread starter
- #181
Cause he's wrong. Wild, huh? A lawyer could be wrong.Perhaps you'd like to take a crack at explaining why a rather liberal Harvard Constitutional law scholar like Alan Dershowitz agrees with Trey Gowdy that Lois Lerner waived her 5th Amendment rights on the topic that she covered in her little speech to the Congressional panel?
Or do you think that you know more about Constitutional law than the learned Harvard Professor?
SCOTUS has held that the 5th Amendment privilege is available in "any proceeding, civil or criminal, administrative or judicial,
investigatory or adjudicatory and it protects against any disclosures that the witness reasonably believes could be used
in a criminal prosecution...."
When the privilege is invoked as part of an investigation, the committee is required to respect it.
Yes, the privilege can be waived. However, for a waiver to be effective, it must be clear and unequivocal, and cannot be "lightly inferred." Further, courts typically indulge every reasonable presumption against finding 'testimonial waiver.'"
Klein v. Harris (1981). See also Quinn v. United States (1955)
Furthermore, voluntarily testifying and and involuntarily testifying play a part in the equation.
In addition, "a waiver typically occurs only when a witness asserts specific facts. Mere proclamations of innocence usually do not suffice.
In United States v. Hoag , the defendant was subpoenaed to appear before the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. When asked,
"If the Communist Party ordered you to sabotage the work you are doing, assuming that we were at war with Communist Russia, would you obey those orders or would you refuse to obey them?" In response, the defendant stated, "I have never engaged in espionage nor sabotage. I am not so engaged. I will not so engage in the future. I am not a spy nor a saboteur." She thereafter invoked her Fifth Amendment right. The court, relying in part on the New York Court of Appeals in People ex rel. Taylor v. Forbes held that the defendant did not waive her Fifth Amendment right by virtue of her general denial." link
Wow you know more than a Constitutional lawyer because you spent 15 minutes searching case law.
Brilliant.