Thursday, November 25, 2010

Does silence imply guilt as Kaine Horman claims? Or does a person have the right to remain silent without implicating themself in a crime?

The Constitution guarantees the right (Fifth Amendment) against self incrimination yet Kaine Horman believes Terri is guilty because she has not said anything in her defense.  In two videos I previously posted (see: MUST WATCH VIDEOS: Why Terri Horman's attorneys told her to keep her mouth shut ) it shows the very reason why no one should talk to law enforcement without an attorney protecting their rights.

Kaine Horman is using the divorce proceedings to force Terri to talk when the constitution - upheld by the courts - says she does not need to say anything in her own defense.  Terri Horman spoke to law enforcement for four weeks without an attorney present and she fully cooperated according to both Kaine Horman and law enforcement.  Now because she cannot be forced to admit she is guilty of something she likely did not do (see: Kaine wants to force Terri to confess, even if though he knows she is innocent ), Kaine is trying to force her to speak on the record (you can bet he will release the court documents to the media with his spin on it) so he can use it as ammunition in his continued defamation and gaslighting of his wife.

There are many innocent people who spoke in their defense thinking they had nothing to hide.  Many of them ended up being convicted and spending years in prison or, in some cases, were executed for a crime they did not commit.

Kaine Horman speaks a lot without saying anything of significance so what is he hiding by omission?
In the papers filed Friday, Kaine asked the court to consider Terri's "silence as an admission regarding Father's factual allegations."

"The fact that Mother's own attorney has told the Court that Mother intends to plead the Fifth speaks volumes about what mother has to hide," attorneys said.

"One can only infer that Mother will not speak because her testimony will lead to criminal liability for Kyron's disappearance."

Kaine and his attorneys said until Terri denies the accusations, no other conclusion can be made.

1.  understood without being openly expressed; implied: tacit approval.
2.  silent; saying nothing: a tacit partner.
3.  unvoiced or unspoken: a tacit prayer.  IE: unspoken "admission" of guilt,9171,899502,00.html
Suspected of stealing from his employer, Bethlehem Construction Worker Joseph Dravecz had stood mute when police read his accuser's statement to him. Dravecz was convicted largely on the basis of his silence. By a vote of 6 to 1, though, the high court reversed the conviction and voided the tacit-admission rule in Pennsylvania.

If a defendant "could not be made a self-accusing witness by coerced answers," wrote Justice Michael Musmanno for the court, "he should not be made a witness against himself by unspoken, assumed answers. A direct confession unwillingly given is a coerced confession. A tacit admission is still an unwilling performance. The decisions of :he Supreme Court of the United States have, in effect, shattered the tacit-admission rule. Whatever may be left of the rule after the enfilading fire of the Supreme Court is here overruled."

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are moderated. Be nice or I'll turn them off again

Subscribe Now!
addtomyyahoo4 Subscribe in NewsGator Online Subscribe with Bloglines
Add to netvibes Add to Google .
original feed View Feed XML