subpoena to testify, why must you testify?

[45calibre]

if you are subpoenaed to testify in court for something why must you testify? cant you just use your right to remain silent and not answer a single question besides identifying yourself? i did a quick search and saw that the only times you do not have to testify is if it could incriminate you and a few others.

 

[gunman41mag]

hillery didn't testified

 

[poptab]

Yea i dont quite know how they can force you to speak by threatening jail. Especially victims. Put the victim in jail because they refuse to testify! Sounds like justice to me.

 

[spec4]

IANAL, but I thought if you refused to testify (5th Amendment) the prosecutor could grant you immunity and force you to testify. If you didn't, you would be in contempt of court. Isn't that what happened to Susan McDougal because she refused to testify against the Clintons?

 

[ATOMonkey]

Yes, you don't have to say anything.

However, courts have their own rules and can pretty much so do whatever they want. They can send cops to fetch you, physically drag you to court, and if you don't talk, they'll lock you up. Of course, that's all up to the discretion of the judge.

Hurray for inheriting common law practices from the old world.

 

[Paco Bedejo]

But, judges are all fair & wiHAHA I couldn't even finish that

 

[HoughMade]

I am not giving any person specific legal advice here, I am just speaking in generalities. I don't represent you (the royal you), any of you); you cannot rely n anything I say as legal advice.

When a proper subpoena, with witness fee when necessary, is served, you must testify under the penalty of being held in contempt of court if you do not. Is that just? In m view ABSOLUTELY. The government is charged with maintaining a civil and criminal justice system in order to avoid "private justice" (a one sentence summary of a very complex concept). The system does not work if evidence, testimony under oath, cannot be compelled.

The inability to compel testimony would have the effect of affording advantage to the side who is able to get people who would harm their case not to talk. Last week I had to have a subpoena served on a doctor who just didn't want to be involved (the other side was not involved in that). A plaintiff put his medical condition in controversy in the case and this doctor had treated the condition before my client ever got involved. Under the evidence rules, I need to have that doctor testify as to why he diagnosed what he did and establish that this medical condition was present before my client's actions. Without that testimony, it would be more difficult for me to establish that my client could not have caused that condition.

Now, how is it justice if a trial is based only on testimony that people want to give? You may say- well, they'll just lie. Sure that happens, but you would be surprised at how the oath and witness box bring out the truth.

As for pleading the 5th, long story short, there has to be some reasonable basis to believe that the testimony given could be incriminating to you. Wide latitude is given when there is a colorable claim of possible incrimination, but that latitude is not without limits and a judge can review a Fifth Amendment claim and, depending on the circumstances, rule it improperly invoked and order the testimony....oh yeah, and as mentioned above, if immunity is given, testimony can be compelled as well.

While I may disagree with the rulings at times, I absolutely believe in these concepts.

 

[Westside]

Yea i dont quite know how they can force you to speak by threatening jail. Especially victims. Put the victim in jail because they refuse to testify! Sounds like justice to me.

The short an easy answer is they arrest you for "Obstruction of justice"

Indiana Code 35-44.1-2

IC 35-44.1-2-2
Obstruction of justice
Sec. 2. (a) A person who:
(1) knowingly or intentionally induces, by threat, coercion, or false statement, a witness or informant in an official proceeding or investigation to:
(A) withhold or unreasonably delay in producing any testimony, information, document, or thing;
(B) avoid legal process summoning the person to testify or supply evidence; or
(C) absent the person from a proceeding or investigation to which the person has been legally summoned;
(2) knowingly or intentionally in an official criminal proceeding or investigation:
(A) withholds or unreasonably delays in producing any testimony, information, document, or thing after a court orders the person to produce the testimony, information, document, or thing;
(B) avoids legal process summoning the person to testify or supply evidence; or
(C) absents the person from a proceeding or investigation to which the person has been legally summoned;
(3) alters, damages, or removes any record, document, or thing, with intent to prevent it from being produced or used as evidence in any official proceeding or investigation;
(4) makes, presents, or uses a false record, document, or thing with intent that the record, document, or thing, material to the point in question, appear in evidence in an official proceeding or investigation to mislead a public servant; or
(5) communicates, directly or indirectly, with a juror otherwise than as authorized by law, with intent to influence the juror regarding any matter that is or may be brought before the juror;
commits obstruction of justice, a Class D felony.
(b) Subsection (a)(2)(A) does not apply to:
(1) a person who qualifies for a special privilege under IC 34-46-4 with respect to the testimony, information, document, or thing; or
(2) a person who, as:
(A) an attorney;
(B) a physician;
(C) a member of the clergy; or
(D) a husband or wife;
is not required to testify under IC 34-46-3-1.
As added by P.L.126-2012, SEC.54.

 

[poptab]

I am not giving any person specific legal advice here, I am just speaking in generalities. I don't represent you (the royal you), any of you); you cannot rely n anything I say as legal advice.

When a proper subpoena, with witness fee when necessary, is served, you must testify under the penalty of being held in contempt of court if you do not. Is that just? In m view ABSOLUTELY. The government is charged with maintaining a civil and criminal justice system in order to avoid "private justice" (a one sentence summary of a very complex concept). The system does not work if evidence, testimony under oath, cannot be compelled.

The inability to compel testimony would have the effect of affording advantage to the side who is able to get people who would harm their case not to talk. Last week I had to have a subpoena served on a doctor who just didn't want to be involved (the other side was not involved in that). A plaintiff put his medical condition in controversy in the case and this doctor had treated the condition before my client ever got involved. Under the evidence rules, I need to have that doctor testify as to why he diagnosed what he did and establish that this medical condition was present before my client's actions. Without that testimony, it would be more difficult for me to establish that my client could not have caused that condition.

Now, how is it justice if a trial is based only on testimony that people want to give? You may say- well, they'll just lie. Sure that happens, but you would be surprised at how the oath and witness box bring out the truth.

As for pleading the 5th, long story short, there has to be some reasonable basis to believe that the testimony given could be incriminating to you. Wide latitude is given when there is a colorable claim of possible incrimination, but that latitude is not without limits and a judge can review a Fifth Amendment claim and, depending on the circumstances, rule it improperly invoked and order the testimony....oh yeah, and as mentioned above, if immunity is given, testimony can be compelled as well.

While I may disagree with the rulings at times, I absolutely believe in these concepts.

So say i refuse to testify for whatever reason. I get thrown in jail. How long do i sit in jail? Is it just to keep me there indefinatly? Or is there a limit?

 

[Hogwylde]

I've always wondered what would happen if when they ask you if "you swear to tell the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth" you drop your hand and say "NO, I will only give truthfull answers to questions asked of me and nothing else."

 

[HoughMade]

poptab- there may be a limit, but I am not aware of it. In my practice, I have had bench warrants (arrest warrants) issued a few times, and that always made the witness more cooperative. However, I only do civil law so I doubt they would actually be taken to jail, at least not immediately. What would probably happen is that the arrest warrant is issued, then when executed, the person has to post a bond and is scheduled for a "contempt" hearing (keep in mind that by this stage, we have probably been before the judge at least three times with heightened levels of orders and warnings being given). If he blows off the contempt hearing, then he may be held for a while, but in civil cases, that's pretty rare.

Hogwylde- you are only bound to truthfully answer questions asked of you in any event. When put under oath in a deposition or witness box, there is no duty to volunteer information, but if you play games too close to the edge where the answers given are misleading without context, there is the possibility of sanctions, but it's a remote possibility.

 

[You'll shoot your eye out]

Just a question, What if you refuse the oath? What if you won't swear to tell the truth? how can they compel the oath? Wont they be forcing perjury by intimidating someone to swear to tell the truth? Are you already sworn to be telling the truth when you are asked to swear to tell the truth? "Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?" , answer;"NO!" What then?

 

[45calibre]

so they can compell you to testify against a friend or a family member? so in reality you do not have the right to remain silent?

 

[ATOMonkey]

so they can compell you to testify against a friend or a family member? so in reality you do not have the right to remain silent?

No, you still have the right to remain silent. They just jail you for exercising your right.

Also, at least half of the people in any courtroom are lying.

Wouldn't be much of a trial if everyone told the truth. Would be even less of a trial if anyone actually believed what was being said was the truth.

Justice has no place in the American Legal System.

 

[poptab]

Thats like saying taxes are voluntary

 

[HoughMade]

so they can compell you to testify against a friend or a family member? so in reality you do not have the right to remain silent?

You can be compelled to testify "against" anyone, except your spouse...and very limited other exceptions.


I put "against" in quotes because the object is to tell the truth. If that ends up being bad for someone, so be it.

There is no generalized "right to remain silent" What the Fifth Amendment says is:

"No person... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself..."

In a criminal case you cannot be forced to provide testimony that subjects you to criminal prosecution. That is the extent of the right.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Silence is absolutely a right, it just isn't specifically spelled out.

You don't need to government to compel someone or something in order for you to be silent.

Life and Liberty are also rights. Although, some of us seem to think they're more privileges.

 

[Caldad]

I believe the only time you have the legal right not to testify, is if it may be self-incriminating. If you're not on trial, then I don't think that right exists in the eyes of the law.

 

[SERparacord]

if you are subpoenaed to testify in court for something why must you testify? cant you just use your right to remain silent and not answer a single question besides identifying yourself? i did a quick search and saw that the only times you do not have to testify is if it could incriminate you and a few others.

answer the first question with "I don't remember".

 

[EvilBlackGun]

And then there is the "Hillary" theory of testimony:

Fall down, have a concussion, and dis-remember all things pertinent.

So say i refuse to testify for whatever reason. I get thrown in jail. How long do i sit in jail? Is it just to keep me there indefinatly? Or is there a limit?