Ask Lemmy

27047 readers

1449 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]

Rules: (interactive)

1) Be nice and; have fun

Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them

2) All posts must end with a '?'

This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?

3) No spam

Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.

4) NSFW is okay, within reason

Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].

5) This is not a support community.

It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.

Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

-7

How do you feel about the penalties that exist for witnesses who refuse to testify in court? (self.asklemmy)

submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by MediaSensationalism to c/asklemmy

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Do you feel that the 4th amendment should protect them? Or perhaps a new amendment should be written to protect them and abolish power of subpoena?

I'm slightly biased as I ask this. I feel that the mind is "sacred" in a sense, that it should be considered a fundamental human right for an individual to be able to preserve privacy over their internally held thoughts and memories, and that the ability of the court to force an individual to speak or disclose part of their mind is a wild overreach of power and an affront to the personal liberty of the innocent.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MediaSensationalism 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

A witness can still be punished if the court can prove that claims of poor recollection are being abused.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

you mean like when an ex president gets on the stand and says i dont recall to very obvious things he should know?? like that?

[–] MediaSensationalism 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Yes, exactly like that.

Of course, it depends on whether the court can prove their recollection whether or not they can be punished, but the bottom line is that it's still illegal and the court remains legally entitled to forcefully procure truthful thoughts and memories from a person.

I don't support any suggestion that updating the law doesn't matter because it is sometimes difficult to enforce, if that was your intention.