Go on. How is forcing someone to testify against themselves with the threat of criminal charges (tax fraud!) and then using that information in a criminal investigation not a 5th amendment violation.
I’m not a lawyer, I don’t know anything. I’m just curious.
I believe that the current legal situation goes further than just keeping people from being compelled to testify. Pleading the 5th also can't be used as evidence against someone (because that would be a form of compulsion), or even as probable cause.
I asserted that 5th amendment should prevent the government from using this coerced testimony.
Would this not taint any investigation started on the basis of coerced testimony? Why would the exclusionary rule not kick in here?
As far as I understand in a criminal context no adverse inference may be drawn from ones refusal to self-incriminate. How would investigating someone for refusing to self-incriminate to the IRS not be exactly that?
ThePowerOfFuet|3 years ago
You asserted that the 5th should prevent an investigation, but it will do nothing of the sort:
> Presumably investigating someone over that would violate their 5th amendment rights, no?
Rebelgecko|3 years ago
doldols|3 years ago
Would this not taint any investigation started on the basis of coerced testimony? Why would the exclusionary rule not kick in here?
As far as I understand in a criminal context no adverse inference may be drawn from ones refusal to self-incriminate. How would investigating someone for refusing to self-incriminate to the IRS not be exactly that?
E: Found some related literature which I am reading now https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?art...