Fifth Amendment of The Constitution of The United States of America. 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 offence 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. The first part of this amendment guarantees that anyone charged with an infamous crime, today known as a felony crime, must first be charged by a Grand Jury. A Grand Jury is defined as a group of at least 12 individuals, where a majority must vote to indict (charge) someone. In almost all cases, however, Grand Juries are known to go along with prosecutors. As one widely repeated quote has stated Any prosecutor who wanted, could indict a ham sandwich. Unfortunately, we seem to think that Obama is untouchable. The second part of the clause in this amendment outlaws what is known as double jeopardy. Someone cannot be tried twice for the same crime, if he or she is found not guilty. This only happens if the accused person is found not guilty, and not if there is what is called a hung jury, where the jury cannot reach an agreement. An exception can be found to the double jeopardy rule when the accused is either charged a second time in a different jurisdiction or sued again civilly. In these cases, the federal government has brought federal charges against an individual who was found not guilty of killing African Americans in South, as a violation of the civil rights of the person killed. Another examples is that OJ Simpson could be sued for wrongful death in civil court, after being found not guilty of murder in criminal court. The next section of the amendment states that a person may not be compelled to bear witness (testify) against himself. Thus, when a defendant takes the Fifth he or she is invoking this amendments protection against self-incrimination. The Supreme Court expanded this right in its famous Miranda decision, in which the court stated that the accused needed to told of their rights. From this, the term to mirandize developed. The next line of the amendment is a catch all phrase, where it states that life, liberty or property may not be taken without due process. This is known as the due process clause and it requires that the government must use the courts in order to take anything from a person, whether by executing them, imprisoning them, or taking away their property. The last part of the amendment deals with what is known as eminent domain; the right of the government to seize private property for the public good. This amendment first states that if property is taken, the person whose property it is must be compensated. By saying so it gives the government the right to take the property, even if the person does not want to give it up. One of the issues that has been disputed in recent years is what is defines public use. Is it public use to take private land to build a private shopping center that the government believes will improve a neighborhood? In regard to eminent domain, the government is notorious for condemning citizens private property. Many times, the government will make you offers starting high, hoping to acquire the property without condemning it. When the citizen continues to refuse, in many cases the government ends up condemning the property, then compensates the citizen a fraction of what was originally offered.
Posted on: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 23:52:26 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015