Armchair attorneys...

jim schmidt · 01-12-2006, 10:08 PM

Can someone assert a fifth amendment right in a civil (traffic) offense?

OFFICER737 · 01-12-2006, 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jim schmidt

Can someone assert a fifth amendment right in a civil (traffic) offense?

Civil traffic offense? Give me an example bro. The fifth says you have the right to remain silent against self incrimination.

bumblebee · 01-13-2006, 11:01 AM

The answer would be NO...The Amendment specifically says criminal case...

Amendment V - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

bumblebee · 01-13-2006, 11:04 AM

Check your use of the word "civil" again, Do you understand the difference between civil and criminal actions?

jim schmidt · 01-13-2006, 11:22 AM

I'm really looking for the answer to the question. Not a parsing of the question. I know what I asked and I know what it means.

bumblebee · 01-13-2006, 11:29 AM

I don't think you do...

A traffic offense involving a citation is still a criminal matter even if it is a misdemeanor. A Civil matter is where someone is being sued over a traffic incident. You can invoke the 5th in a criminal matter, but as usual, you are playing word games and are avoiding discussion

and the answer to your question is there in my previous post.

appleripper · 01-13-2006, 11:55 AM

You feel ok Jim?

bee is absolutely correct a traffic offense is still criminal. But to specifically answer your question yes I believe so. When getting arrested you are read your Miranda rights which basically tell you to not talk without a lawyer or you will probably incriminate your self through your speech which can then be used against you. Therefore giving you "the right to remain silent".

However if in court you were asked specifically if you ran a stop sign you would then probably be forced to answer and then tell the truth thereby incriminating yourself. I believe in this situation just mentioned you cannot plead the fifth.

jim schmidt · 01-13-2006, 02:49 PM

Arrrrrrrgggg. Camera offenses are civil matters specifically so they don't have to meet the same burden of proof as for a criminal statute and so that recipients of these fines don't have the same rights to contest them.

In the case in point, someone I know received a camera speeding ticket in DC. The owner of the vehicle was not driving. All possible actual drivers have decided to assert a fifth amendment right rather than confess to driving. The owner, since the owner was factually not the driver, would like to know if this would be a valid defense for the owner to make. The defense hinges on the novel concept that the owner was operating as a defacto extension of law enforcement in questioning suspects.

Now, can we please deal with the question at hand? Sheesh!

appleripper · 01-13-2006, 03:08 PM

The situation you decsribed does in fact meet the criteria you had initially put out here is my response. The way the matter becomes a civil matter instead of criminal is because the state has no burden to prove who was driving. Therefore immediately negating any punishment other than a fine to the owner. The burden in this matter is on the defendant, who is the owner and possiblly not the driver, to prove not whether he or she was driving but that it is the wrong vehicle by way of stolen plate or maybe the it is a different state and was wrong that way. The state puts a reasonable amount of duty on those that own vehicles for use on public roads type of BS to operate them in a safe manner. I agree it is wrong and big brotherish but it is what it is. I'd say unless your buddy can prove that it was a mistaken vehicle he or she will have to pony up on the civil fine.

bumblebee · 01-13-2006, 03:18 PM

I can't believe a traffic offense would ever be a Civil matter because the penalties involved include fines, suspensions/revocations and possibly even jail time...The Amendment says Criminal matters, so I would say NO

appleripper · 01-13-2006, 03:31 PM

Bumble,
Jim explained it correctly redlight camares and speed cameras are civil fines. If they get your face I guess that is strong enough evidence to try in the criminal courts. Even if they had your picture they'd probably keep it civil easier on them just to send a bill. Basically in the civil matter they are just fining the owner of the license plate.

OFFICER737 · 01-14-2006, 02:01 AM

This is kind of a gray area isn't it? A private citizen can prosecute a traffic offense in court. If a company is acting in a law enforcement capacity or as an agent for a law enforcement dept. then prosecuting a criminal case and not a civil one.

Back to the original question though. In a civil case a person may use the 5th ammendment to prevent themselves from self incrimination. Testtimony is public record and can be brought into a criminal case and the person charged at a later date.