 |
|
If you could read you'd know why this was reposted
Posted on: August 11, 2022 at 13:04:12 CT
TexJohnson MU
Posts:
3162
Member For:
6.31 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
instead you make assumptions and jump to conclusions like most derps here.
Depends on civil case vs criminal case
Posted on: August 11, 2022 at 12:14:54 CT
TigerJackSwartz MU10,000 Posts
Posts:61946
Member For:14.52 yrs
Level:User
M.O.B. Votes:0
In civil cases, “the Fifth Amendment does not forbid adverse inferences against parties to civil actions when they refuse to testify in response to probative evidence offered against them.” (Baxter v. Palmigiano (1976) 425 U.S. 308, 318.)
Under Baxter, an opposing party can’t simply point to the silence and claim victory in their civil case. A court is entitled to draw adverse inferences against the party who “pleads the Fifth.” As Justice Brandeis said, “Silence is often evidence of the most persuasive character.” (United States ex rel. Bilokumsky v. Tod (1923) 263 U.S. 149, 153-154.)
In a criminal procedure, the court must instruct the jury that it cannot draw an inference of guilt from a defendant’s failure to testify about facts relevant to his case, (Griffin v. California (1965) 80 U.S. 609).
Depends on civil case vs criminal case
Posted on: August 11, 2022 at 12:14:54 CT
TigerJackSwartz MU10,000 Posts
Posts:61946
Member For:14.52 yrs
Level:User
M.O.B. Votes:0
In civil cases, “the Fifth Amendment does not forbid adverse inferences against parties to civil actions when they refuse to testify in response to probative evidence offered against them.” (Baxter v. Palmigiano (1976) 425 U.S. 308, 318.)
Under Baxter, an opposing party can’t simply point to the silence and claim victory in their civil case. A court is entitled to draw adverse inferences against the party who “pleads the Fifth.” As Justice Brandeis said, “Silence is often evidence of the most persuasive character.” (United States ex rel. Bilokumsky v. Tod (1923) 263 U.S. 149, 153-154.)
In a criminal procedure, the court must instruct the jury that it cannot draw an inference of guilt from a defendant’s failure to testify about facts relevant to his case, (Griffin v. California (1965) 80 U.S. 609).
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
If you could read you'd know why this was reposted - TexJohnson MU - 8/11 13:04:12
-