Yes, a very good idea, which goes back to at least 13th century English law. As with so many things, the original ideas become somewhat obscured with the passage of time and the changes in law and language. This amendment would be better if rewritten in modern English in light of modern American law, but that is unlikely to happen. Courts have been hearing arguments about and therefore "interpreting" this amendment for a long, long time.
2007-11-17 12:46:27
·
answer #1
·
answered by Husker41 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
whats the fifth amendment i thought they only made it up to the 3rd amendment
2007-11-17 12:42:15
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Protection from self incrimination, What would you say is wrong in that. it's a very good idea. it applies to any defendant, it is a protection for people that just testifying could make a jury predjudiced against they even if you are not guilty.
2007-11-17 12:42:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by redd headd 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
What do you think?
2007-11-17 12:36:55
·
answer #4
·
answered by labelapark 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes but it's not like it's being used currently by this country anyways.
2007-11-17 12:37:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by Justin E 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
actually that is the one amendment i never really understood. Sorry i cant fully answer your question...
2007-11-17 12:32:10
·
answer #6
·
answered by Zarathustra 2
·
0⤊
2⤋