Module II: Defenses and Privileges: The Fifth Amendment Privilege Testimony
In this video, you #39;ll learn about the various privileges and defenses that may be asserted in opposition to a summons or subpoena. The focus is on the Fifth Amendment Privilege against self-incrimi...
By: Tax Chat
Excerpt from:
Module II: Defenses and Privileges: The Fifth Amendment Privilege & Testimony - Video
Part II: Defenses and Privileges: The Fifth Amendment Privilege Testimony
Description.
By: Michael DeBlis
Excerpt from:
Part II: Defenses and Privileges: The Fifth Amendment Privilege & Testimony - Video
Module III: Defenses and Privileges: The Fifth Amendment Privilege Document Production/Immunity
By: Tax Chat
More here:
Michael Brelo trial: Day 3 afternoon session
NEOMG reporter Ida Lieszkovszky talks about Cleveland police officer Michael Demchak invoking the Fifth Amendment during officer Michael Brelo #39;s trial on Wednesday, April 8.
By: cleveland.com
See the original post here:
CPD Officer Invokes Fifth Amendment right during Michael Brelo trial
A CPD police officer invoked his Fifth Amendment right during CPD patrol officer Michael Brelo #39;s trial Wednesday. WEWS NewsChannel5 is On Your Side with breaking news weather updates...
By: WEWS NewsChannel5
The rest is here:
CPD Officer Invokes Fifth Amendment right during Michael Brelo trial - Video
A Clevelandpolice officer refused to testify Wednesday during the trial of a colleague, Officer Michael Brelo, who facestwo counts of manslaughterin a case that involved a wild high-speed chase. Officer Michael Demchak invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination on the witness stand after answering just a few basic questions about his identity and work history, citing advice from an attorney to not testify unless granted immunity, Cleveland.comreported.
Cuyahoga County (Ohio) Prosecutor Timothy J. McGinty wasn't pleased with the officer's refusal to answer questions. "We need his testimony in this trial. We're asking for his testimony," McGinty said, asWEWS-TV reported."We're asking for the truth. That is his duty as a police officer."
Brelo, who was indicted on two counts of voluntary manslaughter May 30, 2014, is on trial in connection with the Nov. 29, 2012, deaths ofTimothy Russell and Malissa Williams. Russell, 43, and Williams, 30, both unarmed, led police on a wild car chase that involved more than 100 officers and 60 police cars. Russell and Williams were each struck with more than 20 rounds after police fired nearly 100 shots at the 1979 Chevrolet Malibuin which the pair had been traveling.
Brelo, 31, fired 49 rounds and reportedly jumped on the hood of the car and fired about 15 rounds after the chase had concluded, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported. Prosecutors argue the action was unjustifiable since the chase was over.
Investigators said Demchak fired his gun four times during the incident and prosecutors filed motions before the trial opposing police officers who might invoke the Fifth Amendment, Cleveland.com reported. McGinty reportedly told the court that police officers knew one of the fellow officers had done something wrong that night but were refusing to come forward.
The judge in the case decided to allow police officers to invoke the Fifth Amendment just as any other citizen would be allowed to do. "You're asking a witness to rely on your word that you won't charge him, but that's just not the standard," said Judge John P. O'Donnell, as Cleveland.com reported.
Prosecutors expressed frustration that Demchak's refusal to testify had set a precedent. "It won't end with this," McGinty told the court, Cleveland.com reported. "I am reluctant to start doing it here and now for fear of the future result."
Two other police officers -- the first to say he saw Brelo on the hood of the car and that officer's partner -- have been granted immunity in the case thus far. Two more police officers are expected to invoke the Fifth Amendment in the trial, Cleveland.com reported.
The trial beganMondayand is expected to last five to seven weeks.In December 2014, following an investigation that began in response to the shooting of Russell and Williams,U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder found that the Cleveland Division of Police engaged in a pattern of excessive use of deadly force.
See the rest here:
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Cleveland police detective Michael Demchak invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination shortly after being called to the witness stand Wednesday to testify in the trial of fellow officer Michael Brelo. A heated argument ensued.
Demchak, who was involved in the 22-minute chase and fired some shots at the car driven by Russell, was granted his right by Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court Judge John P. O'Donnell.
Prosecutor Timothy McGinty filed a motion saying he wanted to treat any Cleveland police officers that might testify during the trial as hostile witnesses. The motionargues police officers were not fully cooperative with investigators during interviews with the Ohio Attorney General's Bureau of Investigations and with prosecutors' efforts leading up to the trial.
Brelo is the only officer to face criminal charges in the November 2012 chase that ended with 13 officers firing 137 shots into a car fatally shooting unarmed Russell and Williams.
Brelo, who prosecutors have said fired 49 of the shots, waived his right to a jury. O'Donnell will ultimately render a verdict in the case.
Read more:
Watch Cleveland police officer take the Fifth in Michael Brelo trial sparking heated debate (video)
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The otherwise low-key trial of Cleveland police officer Michael Brelo saw some drama Wednesday, the third day of testimony, when a fellow police officer refused to testify.
Prosecutors got through just a couple basic questions about the identity and work history of Cleveland police officer Michael Demchak beforeDemchak invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination on the witness stand.
According to a report from the Bureau of Criminal Investigation, Demchak was one of 13 officers that fired their guns one night in November 2012, when two unarmed suspects were killed. Investigators concluded Demchak fired his gun four times.
Brelo, 31, is on trial on two counts of manslaughter in the case ofTimothy Russell and Malissa Williams, who were shot to death by police in a 1979 Chevy Malibu. Russell, the driver, had evaded police during a 22-minute car chase through Cleveland and East Cleveland on Nov. 29, 2012.
Demchak told the court he invoked his right based on the advice of his attorney and would not testify unless he is granted immunity by the prosecutor's office.
Prosecutors had filed motions before the start of the trial opposing police officers who may invoke the Fifth Amendment. And they were quick to voice their opposition in court as well.
"We don't believe police officers should be granted immunity for testifying," assistant prosecuting attorney Adam Chaloupka told the court. Chaloupka said police officers should trust the Prosecutor's Office to not to charge them for testimony given during the trial.
Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Timothy J. McGinty, who has been present but silent at the proceedings until Wednesday, told the court that as a matter of public policy police officers should be required to testify without being able to demand immunity.
"It won't end with this," McGinty told the court. "I am reluctant to start doing it here and now for fear of the future result."
McGinty also told the court that police officers knew one of their fellow officers did something wrong that night, but refused to come forward with that information to investigators.
Follow this link:
Cleveland police officer refuses to testify during trial of fellow officer Michael Brelo (video)
Updated at 4:33 p.m. ET
The Justice Department will not pursue criminal contempt charges against former IRS official Lois Lerner, who was at the center of a political storm over the agency's alleged targeting of conservative groups. The announcement came from Ronald Machen, the outgoing U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, to House Speaker John Boehner. (The letter is embedded at the bottom of this story.)
Here's the background: Lerner invoked her Fifth Amendment rights and refused to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in March 2014. But Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who headed that panel, said at the time that Lerner had waived that right by making an opening statement at a May 2013 hearing in which she proclaimed her innocence in short opening remarks.
The House voted later in 2014 to hold Lerner in criminal contempt. Machen's office was examining the case and, in the letter dated March 31, he disagreed with Issa's interpretation.
"Ms. Lerner did not waive her Fifth Amendment privilege by making general claims of innocence," his office said in a statement. "The Constitution would provide Ms. Lerner with an absolute defense if she were prosecuted for contempt."
Wednesday's announcement grants a reprieve to the former IRS official, who at the time of the controversy led the agency's division that oversees tax-exempt groups. William Taylor, her attorney, said in a statement: "We are gratified but not surprised by today's news."
But as Politico notes, she and other officials from the Internal Revenue Service are still under investigation by the FBI for the IRS' targeting of conservative groups.
As NPR's Mark Memmott reported at the time: "[A] report ... concluded some conservative groups had been 'deliberately targeted.' (Democrats have released IRS documents showing liberal groups also came in for extra scrutiny.) A political furor erupted, eventually leading to the resignation of the agency's acting director. Lerner retired from the agency later in the year."
You can read the letter in full here:
Continue reading here:
Justice Department Won't Charge IRS' Lois Lerner With Criminal Contempt
The Justice Department has declined to pursue contempt of Congress charges against Lois Lerner for refusing to testify about her role at the IRS in the targeting of conservative groups.
The department announced the decision in a letter Tuesday to House Speaker John Boehner, whose Republican-controlled chamber made the request to prosecute, after holding Lerner in contempt for refusing to testify at committee hearings.
"Once again, the Obama administration has tried to sweep IRS targeting of taxpayers for their political beliefs under the rug, Boehner spokesman Michael Steel told FoxNews.com.
Lerner asserted her Fifth Amendment privilege, which allows people to not testify against themselves, during a May 2013 hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and then again at a March 2014 hearing.
However, House Republicans argued Lerner waived the privilege with an opening statement she made before the committee in the May 2013 appearance. All the chambers Republican members and six Democrats officially voted in May 2014 to hold Lerner in contempt.
Ron Machen Jr., the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, said in the seven-page letter that federal prosecutors concluded Lerner did not waive her privilege because she made only general claims of innocence during the opening statement.
Thus, the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution would provide Ms. Lerner with an absolute defense should be prosecuted for her refusal to testify, wrote Machen, who was appointed to the U.S. attorney post by President Obama and left for private practice Wednesday, one day after sending the letter.
He also said he will not refer the case to a grand jury or take any other action to prosecute.
Lerner ran the IRSs exempt organizations unit when Tea Party and other nonprofit groups with conservative names applying for tax-exempt status were targeted for additional auditing from April 2010 to April 2012.
She was placed on administrative leave in May 2013 and retired four months later.
Read the original:
Feds won't purse contempt charges against Lerner for not testifying before House
SAM HANANEL, Associated Press 5:33 p.m. EDT April 1, 2015
Lois Lerner, ex-director of the Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division at the IRS, declines to answer questions from Rep. Darrell Issa.(Photo: AFP/Getty Images)
WASHINGTON (AP) The Justice Department won't seek criminal contempt charges against Lois Lerner, the former IRS official at the center of a controversy over how the agency treated conservative political groups.
Ronald Machen, the outgoing U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, announced the decision in a March 31 letter to House Speaker John Boehner that was made public on Wednesday.
The GOP-controlled House had referred the case to federal prosecutors after lawmakers voted last year to hold Lerner in contempt of Congress for her refusal to testify before a pair of committee hearings.
Lerner directed the IRS division that processes applications for tax-exempt status. She set off a political firestorm in 2013 when she disclosed that agents had improperly singled out applications from tea party and other conservative groups for extra, sometimes burdensome scrutiny.
An inspector general's report found no evidence of a political conspiracy, instead blaming poor management at the agency. But many Republicans in Congress remain skeptical.
Lerner invoked her Fifth Amendment right not to answer questions at a hearing before the House Oversight Committee. But House Republicans claim she waived her constitutional right by delivering an opening statement in which she declared her innocence.
In his letter, Machen said a team of "experienced career prosecutors" determined that Lerner did not waive her Fifth Amendment rights by making "general claims of innocence."
Machen, whose last day in office was Wednesday, said prosecutors concluded that it would not be appropriate to send contempt charges to a grand jury because the Constitution protects her.
Read the original here:
AP Photo
She is still under investigation for a separate tea party targeting matter.
By John Bresnahan and Rachael Bade
4/1/15 2:16 PM EDT
Updated 4/1/15 5:09 PM EDT
The Justice Department will not seek criminal contempt charges against former IRS official Lois Lerner, the central figure in a scandal that erupted over whether the tax agency improperly targeted conservative political groups.
Ronald Machen, the former U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, told House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) in a seven-page letter this week that he would not bring a criminal case to a grand jury over Lerners refusal to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in March 2014. The House approved a criminal contempt resolution against Lerner in May 2014, and Machens office has been reviewing the issue since then.
Story Continued Below
Lerner and other IRS officials, however, are still under investigation by the FBI for the tea party targeting matter which is a separate probe entirely.
Lerner cited her Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate herself during congressional testimony on March 5, 2014, although then-Oversight Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) said she had waived that right by giving an opening statement at a hearing 10 months earlier when she asserted her innocence. Issa wanted her charged by the Justice Department with criminal contempt of Congress for failing to answer questions about her role in the scandal.
Link:
The Justice Department has declined to pursue contempt of Congress charges against Lois Lerner for refusing to testify about her role at the IRS in the targeting of conservative groups.
The department announced the decision in a letter Tuesday to House Speaker John Boehner, whose Republican-controlled chamber made the request to prosecute, after holding Lerner in contempt for refusing to testify at committee hearings.
"Once again, the Obama administration has tried to sweep IRS targeting of taxpayers for their political beliefs under the rug, Boehner spokesman Michael Steel told FoxNews.com.
Lerner asserted her Fifth Amendment privilege, which allows people to not testify against themselves, during a May 2013 hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and then again at a March 2014 hearing.
However, House Republicans argued Lerner waived the privilege with an opening statement she made before the committee in the May 2013 appearance. All the chambers Republican members and six Democrats officially voted in May 2014 to hold Lerner in contempt.
Ron Machen Jr., the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, said in the seven-page letter that federal prosecutors concluded Lerner did not waive her privilege because she made only general claims of innocence during the opening statement.
Thus, the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution would provide Ms. Lerner with an absolute defense should be prosecuted for her refusal to testify, wrote Machen, who was appointed to the U.S. attorney post by President Obama and left for private practice Wednesday, one day after sending the letter.
He also said he will not refer the case to a grand jury or take any other action to prosecute.
Lerner ran the IRSs exempt organizations unit when Tea Party and other nonprofit groups with conservative names applying for tax-exempt status were targeted for additional auditing from April 2010 to April 2012.
She was placed on administrative leave in May 2013 and retired four months later.
Excerpt from:
Former Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner exercises her Fifth Amendment right not to speak about the IRS targeting investigation before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee during a hearing in the Rayburn House Office Building March 5, 2014 in Washington, DC. Chip Somodevilla, Getty Images
The U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia will not seek contempt charges against former Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner for her refusal to testify before Congress, the Justice Department (DOJ) announced Wednesday.
It has been nearly a year since the House voted to hold Lerner in contempt in a mostly party-line vote. At the time, the charges were referred to the local U.S. attorney. The Justice Department officially informed House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, of U.S. Attorney Ronald Machen's decision in a letter sent to Boehner's office Tuesday.
Play Video
Insisting that she's "done nothing wrong," Lois Lerner, the IRS official in charge of the division that targeted conservative nonprofit groups fo...
"A team of experienced career prosecutors in the U.S. Attorney's Office was assigned to carefully assess the referral. After extensive analysis, the team concluded that the House Committee followed proper procedures in notifying Ms. Lerner that it had rejected her claim of a Fifth Amendment privilege and gave her an adequate opportunity to answer the Committee's questions," the Justice Department said in a statement. "However, the team also concluded that Ms. Lerner did not waive her Fifth Amendment privilege by making general claims of innocence. The Constitution would provide Ms. Lerner with an absolute defense if she were prosecuted for contempt."
Congress' contempt vote stems from Lerner's appearances before the House Oversight Committee. At the start of one hearing in 2013, Lerner made an opening statement declaring her innocence before invoking her Fifth Amendment right. Republicans charge that by delivering her opening statement, she waived her rights against self-incrimination. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and then the full House of Representatives, voted to hold Lerner in contempt for her refusal to testify on March 5, 2014.
2015 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Read the original post:
Ex-Internal Revenue Service official Lois Lerner, a central figure in the IRStargeting scandal, will not face criminal contempt charges for refusing to testify about the matter before a House oversight committee last year.
Ronald Machen, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, said in a letter this week to House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) that he would not bring a criminal case against Lerner, who headed the IRSs exempt-organizations division when the agency inappropriately selected nonprofit advocacy groups for extra scrutiny based on their names and policy positions. S
The former officialacknowledged the agencys mistakes at a legal conference in May 2013, days beforethe release of a scathing inspector generals report about the issue.
[Related: Investigators probing for criminal activity with Lois Lerners missing e-mails]
The House approved a contempt resolutionagainst Lernerin May 2014, after she invoked her Fifth Amendment right not to testify during a hearing with the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. The panels then-chairman, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), insisted that shewaived the right by asserting her innocence during an opening statement.
Machen disagreed with Issa, saying Lerner made only general claimsof innocence and that the Constitution would provide her withan absolute defense should she be prosecuted.
Lerners attorney, William Taylor III, applauded the decision in a statement Wednesday. Anyone who takes a serious and impartial look at this issue would conclude that Ms. Lerner did not waive her Fifth Amendment rights, he said. It is unfortunate that the majority party in the House put politics before a citizens constitutional rights. Ms. Lerner is pleased to have this matter resolved and looks forward to moving on with her life.
Josh Hicks covers the federal government and anchors the Federal Eye blog. He reported for newspapers in the Detroit and Seattle suburbs before joining the Post as a contributor to Glenn Kesslers Fact Checker blog in 2011.
Continue reading 10 minutes left
Read more from the original source:
Federal Eye: Justice Department will not seek contempt charges against Lois Lerner
The Department of Justice will not charge former IRS official Lois Lerner for contempt, despite an attempt by members of the House of Representatives to charge her for refusing to testify during a hearing about whether the department unfairly targeted conservative fundraising groups.
Although the House approved a criminal contempt resolution against Lerner last year for invoking her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination during a Congressional hearing a right that former Congressman Darrell Issa (R-CA) said that she had waived prior to the hearing Politico reports that Ronald Machen, the former former U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, will not file said charges against Lerner.
According to Machen, Lerner, who said that she was innocent in a hearing ten months prior to her citing the Fifth Amendment, was still well within her rights to plead the fifth:
Machen said the Oversight Committee followed proper procedures in telling Lerner that it had rejected her claim of privilege and gave her an adequate opportunity to answer the Committees questions. IRS watchdog probing potential criminal activity in Lerner email mess
However, Machen said Justice Department lawyers determined that Lerner did not waive her Fifth Amendment right by making an opening statement on May 22, 2013, because she made only a general claims of innocence.
Machen added: Given that assessment, we have further concluded that it is not appropriate for a United States Attorney to present the matter to the grand jury for action where, as here, the Constitution prevents the witness from being prosecuted for contempt.
Lerners lawyer welcomed the results, saying that Anyone who takes a serious and impartial look at this issue would conclude that Ms. Lerner did not waive her Fifth Amendment rights, and that his client was pleased to have this matter resolved.
[Politico] [Image via screenshot/CSPAN]
>> Follow Tina Nguyen (@Tina_Nguyen) on Twitter
Link:
Border Patrol - Illegal General Search in El Paso, TX
Border Patrol agents illegally stop and question US Citizens at a border checkpoint in El Paso, TX. The card says: "I do not consent to this stop. -I Invoke and refuse to waive my Fifth Amendment...
By: armedwatchman
Go here to read the rest:
Border Patrol - Illegal General Search in El Paso, TX - Video
A recent case has people wondering if, how, and when police officers can use their property, including their house, to stage law enforcement operations.
A Henderson, NV family claimed officers violated the Third Amendment ("[n]o Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner") by occupying their homes to investigate a domestic dispute at a neighbor's house. A federal court found that, while officers may have committed some other constitutional violations, the amendment didn't apply because the officers were not soldiers.
So is there any limit to when the police can use your property as a base of operations?
No Third Amendment Protection
The District Court in Nevada dismissed the families' Third Amendment claims because it did not consider municipal police officers as soldiers:
I hold that a municipal police officer is not a soldier for purposes of the Third Amendment. This squares with the purpose of the Third Amendment because this was not a military intrusion into a private home, and thus the intrusion is more effectively protected by the Fourth Amendment. Because I hold that municipal officers are not soldiers for the purposes of this question, I need not reach the question of whether the occupation at issue in this case constitutes quartering, though I suspect it would not.
Therefore, it seems likely that the police would have significant leeway in setting up a base of operations on a citizen's private property. It's generally agreed upon that officers may set up speed traps on private property, including driveways, to monitor public highways.
Fourth or Fifth Amendment Protection?
The Fourth Amendment prohibits "unreasonable searches and seizures," a may cover officers occupying private property. Weather officers' presence on private property is unreasonable would likely come down to the property owner's "reasonable expectation of privacy." This determination that could depend on whether officers are inside an owner's home, which carries a higher privacy expectation, or outside where the expectation of privacy is lessened.
The Fifth Amendment's Eminent Domain Clause bars the government from taking personal property for public use without "just compensation." Although courts have expanded the definition of a taking to beyond the forced sale of a home, it remains to be seen whether police officers temporarily occupying private property would apply under the amendment.
Read more:
Aaron Hernandez Murder Trial Dy 31 Pt 6 "Option Of The Fifth Amendment"
March 24, 2015 Tonya refused to speak before the Grand Jury on Aaron #39;s.
By: Look Up Lift Up
Read the original here:
Aaron Hernandez Murder Trial Dy 31 Pt 6 "Option Of The Fifth Amendment" - Video
LEOMINSTER -- A city man suspected of driving under the influence reportedly attempted to invoke the Fifth Amendment when being questioned by a police officer during a traffic stop Saturday.
Andres F. Romero, 25, of 47 Princeton St., Apt. 300, was pulled over on suspicion of speeding on Route 12 northbound at 2:50 a.m. According to a police report, Romero smelled of alcohol, and his speech was slurred.
When the officer who pulled Romero over asked if he had been drinking, Romero did not respond for 15 to 20 seconds. The officer repeated the question, and another 15 to 20 seconds passed without a response from Romero, according to the police report.
When the officer asked for a third time, Romero mumbled: "I'm gonna take the Fifth on that." The officer asked what the Fifth was, and Romero said it was something he had learned in school.
The officer also asked Romero what his level of education is.
"Mount Wachusett," Romero answered, according to the police report.
"Oh, you went to college?" the officer asked.
"No, the Mount. Mount Wachusett Community College," Romero said.
The officer informed Romero that the Mount is a college.
"No, Monty Tech. I went to Monty Tech," Romero said.
Original post: