interesting and disgusting ruling, but what does this have to do with bitcoin?
It isn't specific to bitcoin, but I monitor the SCOTUS for constitutional erosion germane to things that impact the protocol. The legal precedent of non self-incrimination has implications for anonymity and privacy. 
Topic: 5th Amendment? (Read 1132 times)
interesting and disgusting ruling, but what does this have to do with bitcoin?
The tragedy is that the guilt of the fellow is either true or not true, but silence ought never be incriminating. Absence of evidence...
The non-verbal factors (specific gestures and postures suggesting guilty feelings) could be suggested as evidence, but instead they ruled against the silence. Bad precedent.
The supreme court is meant to be better than this.
The non-verbal factors (specific gestures and postures suggesting guilty feelings) could be suggested as evidence, but instead they ruled against the silence. Bad precedent.
The supreme court is meant to be better than this.
http://jonathanturley.org/2013/06/17/the-price-of-silence-supreme-court-rules-that-pre-miranda-silence-can-be-used-against-defendant-to-prove-guilt
Bad facts, make for a bad precedent, using the wrong law.
The dissent here is cautionary.
Bad facts, make for a bad precedent, using the wrong law.
The dissent here is cautionary.
From a legal and jurisprudence perspective, this makes no sense whatsoever. This only makes sense when you understand that the "unofficial" policy of the United States is to install a dictatorship at home and abroad. The National Security State has long trumped constitutional laws and provisions.
http://jonathanturley.org/2013/06/17/the-price-of-silence-supreme-court-rules-that-pre-miranda-silence-can-be-used-against-defendant-to-prove-guilt
Bad facts, make for a bad precedent, using the wrong law.
The dissent here is cautionary.
Bad facts, make for a bad precedent, using the wrong law.
The dissent here is cautionary.
Jump to: