The guy happened to be a photographer, but his being subpoenaed and held in contempt had to do with him refusing to testify against his corrupt DEA brother. He “pled the Fifth” to avoid, in his own words, testifying against his brother, which is not what the 5th Amendment protects. His lawyer claimed he was pleading the 5th to prevent accidentally perjuring himself, but there’s no such thing as accidentally perjuring oneself. Prosecutors have to prove you willfully and knowingly told a falsehood.
This is just someone paying the cost they have to pay to protect their criminal brother.
> Prosecutors have to prove you willfully and knowingly told a falsehood.
No, they have to make someone else believe you did. How else would this burden of proof be lifted? some form of brain scan that can just say "yeah, he willfully did it!"? no, they put fourth some motive/set of circumstances, and if a bunch of people believe the spin, its "proved"
> It is worth noting that the DOJ defines perjury as a declarant “willfully” making a false statement, that the declarant believed that what they were saying was untrue, and that the statement was related to a material fact. Misremembering a detail is not, in and of itself, perjury.
The prosecutors and judges have a lot of leeway with assuming "willfully". Plenty of people have been convicted because a prosecutor wanted to apply pressure / make an example and choose to believe an incorrect date was a willful lie.
Something about this smells like a bad attorney. Especially the part where he didn’t know that he was free until his card stopped working. But who knows, and it doesn’t matter anyway since the legitimacy of the court system is supposed to rely on common ideas of justice rather than process. If all we have from courts is process, it’s no longer justice, only bureaucratic oppression.
The standard other exemptions are doctor-patient, attorney-client, religious leader-religious person, and spousal confidentiality laws. Some, but not all, states also shield journalist's sources. In the last case, in states without a shield law, going to jail to protect a source's identity is considered a professional honor.
He doesn't have the right to plead the 5th to avoid testifying against anyone but himself or his spouse, so his attempts to plead the 5th were just nonsense. Making an issue now seems to me like the "justice" connected criminals he was protecting by his contempt are somehow more worthy of rights than everyone they have used this tool on.
ethanbond|2 years ago
This is just someone paying the cost they have to pay to protect their criminal brother.
Seems like due process working well AFAICT.
redeeman|2 years ago
No, they have to make someone else believe you did. How else would this burden of proof be lifted? some form of brain scan that can just say "yeah, he willfully did it!"? no, they put fourth some motive/set of circumstances, and if a bunch of people believe the spin, its "proved"
more_corn|2 years ago
No. Not alright.
If you think it’s fine I encourage you to go through it. Oh you’re not interested in spending 18mo in jail? Then STFU.
wmil|2 years ago
The prosecutors and judges have a lot of leeway with assuming "willfully". Plenty of people have been convicted because a prosecutor wanted to apply pressure / make an example and choose to believe an incorrect date was a willful lie.
simple-thoughts|2 years ago
sinuhe69|2 years ago
HWR_14|2 years ago
jvanderbot|2 years ago
l0wp1t|2 years ago
hgsgm|2 years ago
Weddinga and photography have no relations to the substance of the article.
imwillofficial|2 years ago
Terrible.
fatfingerd|2 years ago
singleshot_|2 years ago
NoZebra120vClip|2 years ago
I wonder how many comrades were found insane after January 6th.