On an almost daily basis someone seems to get snared by their own e-mail, blog, comment, post, tweet or text; and it occurred to me that “you have a right to remain silent” and that if you choose to forego that right, “anything you say can and will be used against you” in the court of public opinion. Given that fact, I suppose I ought to exercise that privilege and say no more.
-
Follow
Following
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
Bjcorbin's Blog 
After reading your article, I’m compelling to share your points on this topic. You have done a very good job with your attention to detail you put into this article.
In technical legal terms, [Stanford Law Prof. Jeffrey] Fisher was arguing that, in the pre-arrest context, when an individual is being questioned, the suspect should not have to explicitly claim the Fifth Amendment privilege in order to keep his silence in response to a damaging question from being used against him. The state of Texas, with the support of the federal Department of Justice, told the Court that in no situation before trial should the Fifth Amendment privilege apply unless the individual explicitly, or by strong implication, says something to claim that right. While no prior precedent of the Court settles whether the Fifth Amendment does or does not apply in that circumstance, the Texas lawyer at the lectern Wednesday, Alan K. Curry, encountered a largely skeptical Court in reaction to his plea for such a flat limitation of Fifth Amendment rights. Curry argued that, if an individual does not invoke the Fifth Amendment, then silence in response to a specific police question about the crime should be open to the prosecutor to use against the individual at the trial.