From: Bill Stewart <stewarts@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 95 23:50:09 PST
To: Greg Broiles <gbroiles@darkwing.uoregon.edu>
Subject: Re: GAK and self-incrimination?
Message-ID: <199512110749.XAA11099@ix2.ix.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 02:57 AM 12/10/95 -0800, you wrote:
>The Fifth protects you against *compelled* self-incrimination - in
>particular, the right to be free from the "cruel trilemma" of
>
>        o       conviction of a substantive crime, based on your
>                (true) testimony
>        o       conviction of perjury, for lying when asked to incriminate
>                yourself
>        o       contempt of court sanctions, for refusing to answer

Testimony was often compelled by more direct means than threatened
contempt citations.  Piling rocks on people until they talked was
still in use in the 1600s, unless I've got my dates wrong.
It may have gone out of fashion slightly after witch-burning,
but was still in recent cultural memory of the Constitution's authors.
#--
#				Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, Freelance Information Architect, stewarts@ix.netcom.com
# Phone +1-510-247-0663 Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281