🚀 go-pugleaf

i_tell_it_like_it_is_1@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1175977294.453634.204700@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com: 

> On Apr 5, 3:01 pm, Deadrat <a...@b.com> wrote:
>> i_tell_it_like_it_i...@yahoo.com wrote in
>> news:1175797579.809642.192370 @n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > Why all the sad faces at Department of Justice regarding
>> > "Prosecutorgate"?  What are they hiding?
>>
>> > It sets a bad example....our top law enforcement sheeples not
>> > willing to go under oath to talk of their parts in something they
>> > CLAIM is so innocent......hmmmmmm
>>
>> > Most defendants are presumed GUILTY when they plead the 5th after
>> > they go under oath -
>>
>> This is untrue.  Defendants do not lose their presumption of
>> innocence when they take the 5th; the state's burden does not
>> decrease because a defendant takes the 5th; the state cannot ask the
>> jury to draw any conclusions from a defendant's taking the 5th.
> 
> try telling THAT to someone charged in criminal court in NC.

I'm not saying that juries don't draw conclusions about defendants who 
take the 5th.  I'm saying the state can't ask the jury to draw such 
conclusions.

> Or to
> Michael Peterson in civil court.....he was FORCED to give testimony in
> HIS case, Sherlock!

Someone may be forced to give testimony but not if it puts them in 
jeopardy of incriminating himself.  Was that the case in MP's civil 
proceeding?  I doubt it.

> Oh....maybe Pelosi and all the other Democratic
> Patriots like Harry Reid are taking the wrong tack......take the US
> Department of Justice to CIVIL court, rather than CRIMINAL!  Oh yes,
> oh yes, ohhhhhh YES!
> 
>>
>> Of course, juries cannot give weight to testimony not given, so
>> taking the 5th is often a tactical disadvantage.
> 
> yeah....the juries are instructed that just because the defendant
> takes the 5th it is not supposed to be taken against them.  How about
> the trial involving that law puppy Dog Wake County Sheriff Roth and
> his co-conspiritors Broda and Hinton, who called those black people
> NIGGERS.  Those people were already LEAVING, FFS!, so why didn't the
> big, fat, ugly cops just let them leave?  Last time I checked,
> sheriff's deputies have NO latitude in telling someone HOW to park in
> a parking lot, let alone those leaving.....

I have no idea what you're talking about, let alone how it's relevant to 
taking the 5th.

> 
> all those 3 cops are just gonna lie for each other, is my point in all
> this.  Broda got up and LIED (perjury anyone?) for Roth in his
> case.......... yeah... F*CKIN' LYIN' COPS!.... just like US AG
> Gonzales, thank you very, very much!

What does this raving have to do with the 5th?

>> > and usual people MUST go under oath in any proceeding
>> > against them, no matter what they think of the shambles that our
>> > government represents.
>>
>> This is untrue.  Defendants need not testify at all.  As Libby found
>> out, it is a tactical disadvantage not to testify, because the jury
>> hears the entire state's case, but only a partial case from the
>> defendant. 
> 
> see above about the 'collusion' of government witnesses, especially on
> the part of crooked cops!

What does this do with criminal defendants testifying?

<snip>