@@tasneemahmed5821 No person shall be forced to testify against them selves. The 5th Amendment is his God given right, innocent or guilty it doesn't matter.
@@alexflowers8429 : No, actually *_you're_* the ignorant one. The Fifth Amendment protects the innocent just as much as the guilty. The Founding Fathers were wise enough to know that. Watch this fascinating and eye-opening video to learn more: ruclips.net/video/d-7o9xYp7eE/видео.html
This guy makes learning about the law actually fun for once and actually understandable. Most people trying to teach this subject use big words and are honestly so boring that you are just as confused when its over as when you began. I'm so glad I found this channel because now we can actually learn about law without trailing off after 20 seconds and actually learn this stuff lol.
steven kullman I just cried a little bit and I think they were red, white and blue tears. Which mean of course I need to go to urgent care. (thanks for the kudos)
All you have to do is replace "The people" with "The politicians" and you'll automatically know what you're up against... That's what cracks me up, Joe Shmoe thinks he runs the government. Too funny. Go ahead and try to pull it off, bub. Good luck.
I saw the video where a cop put a 'bad, bad, bad' kid on the floor along with the her desk (he really slammed her down) for misbehaving, this was the first thing I thought of. She had NOT committed a crime, she was not given her Herbies Corpus before arrest. Her civil rights were (as limited as student laws) were abused/disregarded/taken away. The legal custodians (parents) were not called first. I didn't know how important these laws were until something like this happened. Thanks Mr. Hughes. What the hell is a cray cray?
More context would be needed. But, medical records can be considered evidence. Sometimes, it enters the record as a document created in the ordinary course of business.
Just taught the BoR to my kids last week. I brought up the Zimmerman trial to illustrate the point about double jeopardy. Afterwards, I posed the question "Is this fair?" and got some interesting responses. To sum up, I reminded then of Franklin's quote (paraphrased): It's better for 100 guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to suffer unjustly. Teachable moments.
In my S.S class, we are learning about the amendments and this was a cool way to learn about one of them more and actually be able to understand it. Thanks!
Does this ammendment include or remove the right of the U. S. Treasury dept. (IRS) to seize your property or bank account without due process? In other words, how do they seize personal property without a judgment or even, at the very least, a warrant from a judge?
i lost private property real estate to the local government that they built a walking trail for public use on , and i recieved nothing in return for my property. my private property was taken for public use and i recieved not one cent for my property,, they claim i donated it. I have a disability and was liveing on social security and i was very poor at the time, and they say i donated it to them, ,i was in no position to be giveing my property away but accortding to the government i gave them my property. The constitution doesnt mean anything, i learned that the hard way. the constitution is for the rich and powerful, it is not for the common person, the unwashed masses. the system is broken
MrMisanthrope1 If you're telling the truth and you didn't sign away you mr property, which is extremely doubtful, then you have a case tha tag can be easily won.
@DONALD TRUMP - MAGA2020 The government would just claim eminent domain which In federal law, Congress may take private property directly without recourse to the courts by passing an Act transferring title of the subject property directly to the government. In such cases, the property owner seeking compensation must sue the United States for compensation in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. But in her case the state appropriated her land. In Smith v. Eglin the case was dismissed in the 11th Federal Judicial District, Smith eventual won in the highest court of the land led by Justice Antonin Scalia., but ultimately the government took his stretch of land using some new law that materialized out of ether. Don't you Trump people realize you can't fight city hall.
+Paige Houser --- I would like to know more about the taking clause and Eminent domain - its not something that's explained fully and Donald trump was talking about it like a great thing and we should be happy if it happens to us?? thoughts opinions? -- Thank you
imminent domain sometimes makes sense, but never when it is the actual owner of the house who is happy with their home and where they live, and generally imminent domain when used in residential is just a neighborhood full of renters, they get to finish their lease, and the owner gets to say it cannot be renewed. but when it is someone who owns their home i feel that the state owes them at least the respect to find them a comparable home in a similar area that they will be able to afford.
Ok so what about "Sovereign citizens" They can choose not to answer questions, but how can the police continue to investigate when you dont let them search your vehicle and whatnot. If you are speeding, they should be able to arrest you, but at what point does it become noncompliance and stopping an investigation?
I do and I agree that they have been moving towards the idea of having one invoke their right. So just remaining silent won't do the trick but people still have the right to invoke it, to claim it, to stake it. I guess that makes this video that much more important for teaching citizens their rights.
In Tennessee, we have a new law that basically takes away the right against self-incrimination. If a law enforcement officer pulls you over or you are stopped during a roadblock for suspicion of DUI, the cop can very easily obtain a court-ordered warrant to hold you down and get a blood sample to determine if you are under the influence of drugs/alcohol. Being the libertarian I am, this violates the 4th Amendment against unreasonable search and seizure and the right against self-incrimination. I know. I know. The 4th and 5th Amendments are in the federal bill of rights, but with the fact that the state and federal governments are so intertwined anymore with the states taking federal money for roads, there's a good case to be made (at least philosophically) that it's a violation of civil liberties.
Not yours Jason, the idiotic replies are from Dreambro1. But since you bring it up, the Bill of rights don't all only apply as restrictions to federal government. It also expresses God given rights. Inherent rights if that fits you better. Rights that are inherited can not be taken away or even given away. They are there all the time just like my inherited red blood. Things like the right to be armed for self defense, the right to travel, to have kids, etc. If you read what the founders were saying, and maybe you have, it is clear this was their intent. Also it doesn't matter what the founder's intent was either because these rights were there from the beginning of time. The founders just enumerated some of them and mentioned that there are far too many more to write down. Where common law comes into effect.
No, eminent domain is okay, as long as the property owner gets fully compensated ("just compensation") for his land. What _should_ be illegal is civil asset forfeiture, which allows the government to take your property _without_ Due Process and _without_ Just Compensation. _Even if you haven't committed a crime!_ That is an abomination, and it should be outlawed by constitutional amendment, but it happens every day throughout the nation. Read the U.S. Supreme Court case of _Bennis v. Michigan,_ 516 U.S. 442 (1996), where the court allowed an innocent woman's car to be seized and forfeited by the government. It's outrageous.
I like your content and I believe its especially valuable for our young students ( everyone else too) to know they're rights however I think you should perhaps do an update on some of these laws/ supreme court cases that you have mentioned are out of date and have changed. For instance "Stop and Frisk" significant changes and also officers forcing you to provide an ID just because "they say so" is unlawful.
Ha! I cut that part, I made the distinction between criminal and civil trials but yeah.... I went from 25 minutes down to 13, I am finding out its not good to make 67 minute videos.
If your land is taken you shoud be paid what its worth to future investors. Obviously if they are taking it from you, its worth more to you than whats being offered and worth more to them than what they are giving due to the land being forcible removed from your possesion. One of many fucked things about the us government
You are wrong about the Blockburger rule, the court ruling is the opposite of what you claimed. The rule is that even if crimes are tied, if the crimes violate distinct statutory provisions and each require additional proof which the other does not, then they must be tried as separate and distinct violation of the law.
Yes, and you have to provide it. You do not have to answer any further questions, but you have to answer the question of who you are, and provide ID if it is requested
There are two basic levels in the U.S legal system: Federal Law vs. State Law. A federal law applies to the nation as a whole and to all 50 states “We the People as a Government” whereas state laws are in effect within that particular state, Control and Run by the Democratic Party’s. Your Driver's License is a Contract signed by you; for you to drive on a public road - this is a privilege, not a right - But under United States Federal Laws, you have the right to travel on a public road. Under the Authority of the United States Constitution We the People, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby… So remember the next time an officer is demands your driver's License in Hand, waving your fundamental right away, for a privilege, not a right… A driver’s License requirements’ is a Learner's Permit. Sixteen and 17-year-olds starting out on the public road right of way or that you work for congress as a public servant, as bus driver or truck driver etc. no need for a license other than that, no need for a license to “travel” from point a to point b on public road ways that your tax-dollars paid for, it’s a right, not a privilege, stand up for freedom… The Bill Of Rights is part of the 10 Constitution of the United States nation as a whole… Federal law will always supersede state law when the person in question stands to gain more from the Federal law… The Constitution supreme Law of the Land; Remember, if an officer demands your driver's license, you are required by state law to hand over your “Contract” license to an officer, only if you have committed a crime, waving your fundamental rights away, for a privilege, not a right, or go to jail? If you are pulled over by a police officer for a traffic offense, you are always in a Custody arrest; you are going to jail or a ticket. Just say, Officer, Can any of the information that you are demanding from me be used against me in a court of law or to potentially incriminate me in any way? (Just knowing it will) Follow up. I invoke my 5th Amendment right to not hand over information to be a Witness against myself in a court of Law. Follow up. I invoke my 5th Amendment right to not answer any questions without an attorney present. “I don’t answer questions” Follow up, I invoke My Miranda Rights, I want my lawyer, or am I free to go? By signing a traffic ticket; you are only promising to show up in court. A police officer who suspects a driver is under the influence of alcohol or drugs (DUI or DWI) will typically administer various tests, the officer might start with field sobriety tests (FSTs) and then ask the driver to submit to a blood, breath, or urine test. Just say, Officer, Can this field sobriety tests be used against me in a court of law or to potentially incriminate me in any way? Follow up. This been said, Invoke My Miranda Rights, I want my lawyer or am I free to go? The 5th Amendment gives you the right, from being a Witness against yourself in a court of Law. Under Custody arrest you go to jail. If an officer is arresting you in handcuffs, just say, Officer, I must inform you, what you are about to do… This is an Unlawful Arrest; you are attempting to kidnap me… I invoke my 5th Amendment right, No person shall be . . . deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law... This is an illegal kidnaping, I want my lawyer, or am I free to go?
The taking clause when applied to commercial use for the "greater good of the community" is unconstitutional, in my opinion. I would argue that the "greater good of the community" would be a persons right to their own property in said community. Natural rights come before political law.
Checkpoints are unconstitutional. They made "exceptions" for checkpoints. The grounds for the exceptions do not stand up in a true court of law, without bogus "exceptions". They are infringing on my right to travel without being molested.
I'm working on a case rite now, and it's 15 years old in Georgia. Now what or how does one bring the double jeopardy claim when the prosecutor has indicted once to a grand jury then a year later indicts again using the same exact information times and locations on the 2nd indictment again. Basically going to 2 different grand juries with the same info but adding a charge and indicting again
using the right to remain silent also cannot be taken as incriminatory in and of itself. this right is frequently broken these days, because someone will not speak, or someone will not allow a search, it is taken as being suspicious. a sad place that law enforcement has sunk to.
The government took my 2 1/2 acres that I received from my father‘s inheritance to me. I heard I have 30 years to fight it. It sounds to me like the fifth amendment writing. Although I’ve already had chief justice William Rehnquist rule in my favour.
I argued in the affirmative for emminent domain in high school debate club many years ago, but didn't remember that it is part of the Fifth Amendment. Thanks for the refresher course.
Among other things, judges conduct the trial, make rulings as to the admissibility of evidence, and instruct the jury on what the applicable law is and how to apply it to the facts of the case.
I have a question Relating to double jeopardy, if a person is tried and proven innocent but later there is evidence showing they committed the crime can they be sent to prison ?
I don’t see how the ID isn’t effectively answering a question. Makes no sense. That should be disputed. I don’t even carry a wallet when I’m out walking. Why should I tell these guys my name?
To me if you live in a country that can confiscate your property for comercial reasons than you no longer live in a republic, but in a corporation. Imagine you have land you could build a casino on that will employ 100 people, someone comes with a plan to build a hospital there that will employ 300 people, your land gets confiscated, you dont get paid the potentintial value, you loose, (you might even get paid less than would be one year earnings of that casino you planned) now the coporation that bought your confiscated land, declares,their investor no longer will support a hospital build, and they build a casion there, they just got your land discounted for the same reason, their ROI would be just amazing, and there is no way these schemes can be prevented.
No... And I mean No. You do not have to ID unless they have Probable cause of a crime. 6:30 What? How is IDing going to help that there is a crime a foot?
Yes, but that's a totally different thing. A criminal case is the *Government* prosecuting the defendant, and if the government wins, you can be put in prison. A civil case is a private lawsuit by a *private individual* or organization, and if the plaintiff wins, you can't be sent to jail. The worst that can happen is that you'll have to pay money. Furthermore, the standard of proof is very different. While in a criminal case, the government must prove your guilt by proof beyond a reasonable doubt, in a civil case, the plaintiff only needs to prove that you are liable for damages by a preponderance of the evidence -- that is, it's only necessary for the plaintiff to prove that it's *more likely than not* that you did whatever you're accused of. That's a much weaker (easier to meet) standard. So it might be that in a given situation, there is not enough evidence to prove that a person is guilty _beyond a reasonable doubt,_ but the evidence is strong enough for a jury to say that he "probably" did it (that is, that it's more likely than not).
Kelo vs NL - for commercial reaons?? I dont think that was the founding fathers intent for em. domain. It would have to be of Immense value to the city to be even considered imho, but im sure thats not how it plays out across usa in the real world
![Quando Rondo - Grow Up [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8zFnCg3BO4Q/mqdefault.jpg)
This is what quarantine, got me to
One year later the quarantine finally got me here.
Dont feel bad.. Q has fucked up a lot of people's heads..
People get shot over mask arguments...
@@im_jessica_wheres_morty5506lol😅
I plead the 5th in 2010 at my trial. It saved me from 15 years in prison. I got probation.
So you're a criminal who got away with a slap on the wrist
@@tasneemahmed5821 No person shall be forced to testify against them selves. The 5th Amendment is his God given right, innocent or guilty it doesn't matter.
Well...
@@tasneemahmed5821 thank you , these ignorant fucks dont know shit
@@alexflowers8429 : No, actually *_you're_* the ignorant one. The Fifth Amendment protects the innocent just as much as the guilty. The Founding Fathers were wise enough to know that.
Watch this fascinating and eye-opening video to learn more: ruclips.net/video/d-7o9xYp7eE/видео.html
This guy makes learning about the law actually fun for once and actually understandable. Most people trying to teach this subject use big words and are honestly so boring that you are just as confused when its over as when you began. I'm so glad I found this channel because now we can actually learn about law without trailing off after 20 seconds and actually learn this stuff lol.
subbing to this channel is not only the right thing to do its the American thing to do.
steven kullman I just cried a little bit and I think they were red, white and blue tears. Which mean of course I need to go to urgent care. (thanks for the kudos)
steven kullman I'm Canadian so I'm g
Well said
lol
All you have to do is replace "The people" with "The politicians" and you'll automatically know what you're up against... That's what cracks me up, Joe Shmoe thinks he runs the government. Too funny. Go ahead and try to pull it off, bub. Good luck.
SO many things in just one amendment!
I was forced into a felony confession and my Miranda's were never read to me. This video is heaven sent.
If you dont know your rights:
You dont have any.
@@evocoil7715 very true
Your videos are great, Keith. They help put a lot of readings for school in the proper context. Please keep up the good work.
The background music is distracting though...
I saw the video where a cop put a 'bad, bad, bad' kid on the floor along with the her desk (he really slammed her down) for misbehaving, this was the first thing I thought of. She had NOT committed a crime, she was not given her Herbies Corpus before arrest. Her civil rights were (as limited as student laws) were abused/disregarded/taken away. The legal custodians (parents) were not called first. I didn't know how important these laws were until something like this happened. Thanks Mr. Hughes. What the hell is a cray cray?
*Coercing patients into answering questions for a psychological test (unless they are a harm to themselves or others) violates the 5th amendment*
More context would be needed. But, medical records can be considered evidence. Sometimes, it enters the record as a document created in the ordinary course of business.
Just taught the BoR to my kids last week. I brought up the Zimmerman trial to illustrate the point about double jeopardy. Afterwards, I posed the question "Is this fair?" and got some interesting responses. To sum up, I reminded then of Franklin's quote (paraphrased): It's better for 100 guilty men to go free than for one innocent man to suffer unjustly. Teachable moments.
Agree wholeheartedly, although in Zimmerman's case, he was defending himself from a brutal assault and getting his head smashed against the pavement.
In my S.S class, we are learning about the amendments and this was a cool way to learn about one of them more and actually be able to understand it. Thanks!
Mr. Hughes... I am currently a 2L and I wish I would have known about your page sooner. Your videos are incredibly helpful!! Thank You
Semaj Fields cought channel not page...
Does this ammendment include or remove the right of the U. S. Treasury dept. (IRS) to seize your property or bank account without due process? In other words, how do they seize personal property without a judgment or even, at the very least, a warrant from a judge?
Thanks, dude, I'm doing a project on the Fifth Amendment, and this really helped me out :D.
Same
i lost private property real estate to the local government that they built a walking trail for public use on , and i recieved nothing in return for my property. my private property was taken for public use and i recieved not one cent for my property,, they claim i donated it. I have a disability and was liveing on social security and i was very poor at the time, and they say i donated it to them, ,i was in no position to be giveing my property away but accortding to the government i gave them my property. The constitution doesnt mean anything, i learned that the hard way. the constitution is for the rich and powerful, it is not for the common person, the unwashed masses. the system is broken
MrMisanthrope1 If you're telling the truth and you didn't sign away you mr property, which is extremely doubtful, then you have a case tha tag can be easily won.
@DONALD TRUMP - MAGA2020 The government would just claim eminent domain which In federal law, Congress may take private property directly without recourse to the courts by passing an Act transferring title of the subject property directly to the government. In such cases, the property owner seeking compensation must sue the United States for compensation in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. But in her case the state appropriated her land. In Smith v. Eglin the case was dismissed in the 11th Federal Judicial District, Smith eventual won in the highest court of the land led by Justice Antonin Scalia., but ultimately the government took his stretch of land using some new law that materialized out of ether. Don't you Trump people realize you can't fight city hall.
where have you been all my life!! these videos are freaking amazing!! even my 7 year old gets it!!! THANK YOU!!
+Paige Houser --- I would like to know more about the taking clause and Eminent domain - its not something that's explained fully and Donald trump was talking about it like a great thing and we should be happy if it happens to us?? thoughts opinions? -- Thank you
I was here on RUclips waiting for you guys
What happens when any of the amendments is violated and when the prosecutor líes to the gran jury when the indictment it's been Made ??
imminent domain sometimes makes sense, but never when it is the actual owner of the house who is happy with their home and where they live, and generally imminent domain when used in residential is just a neighborhood full of renters, they get to finish their lease, and the owner gets to say it cannot be renewed. but when it is someone who owns their home i feel that the state owes them at least the respect to find them a comparable home in a similar area that they will be able to afford.
Ok so what about "Sovereign citizens" They can choose not to answer questions, but how can the police continue to investigate when you dont let them search your vehicle and whatnot. If you are speeding, they should be able to arrest you, but at what point does it become noncompliance and stopping an investigation?
You are the best man. Keep this up !!!!!! thank you so much
I do and I agree that they have been moving towards the idea of having one invoke their right. So just remaining silent won't do the trick but people still have the right to invoke it, to claim it, to stake it. I guess that makes this video that much more important for teaching citizens their rights.
Wait. It doesn't?
In Tennessee, we have a new law that basically takes away the right against self-incrimination. If a law enforcement officer pulls you over or you are stopped during a roadblock for suspicion of DUI, the cop can very easily obtain a court-ordered warrant to hold you down and get a blood sample to determine if you are under the influence of drugs/alcohol. Being the libertarian I am, this violates the 4th Amendment against unreasonable search and seizure and the right against self-incrimination. I know. I know. The 4th and 5th Amendments are in the federal bill of rights, but with the fact that the state and federal governments are so intertwined anymore with the states taking federal money for roads, there's a good case to be made (at least philosophically) that it's a violation of civil liberties.
Dreambro1 What an idiotic reply
What? My reply or the other one?
Not yours Jason, the idiotic replies are from Dreambro1.
But since you bring it up, the Bill of rights don't all only apply as restrictions to federal government. It also expresses God given rights. Inherent rights if that fits you better. Rights that are inherited can not be taken away or even given away. They are there all the time just like my inherited red blood. Things like the right to be armed for self defense, the right to travel, to have kids, etc.
If you read what the founders were saying, and maybe you have, it is clear this was their intent. Also it doesn't matter what the founder's intent was either because these rights were there from the beginning of time. The founders just enumerated some of them and mentioned that there are far too many more to write down. Where common law comes into effect.
Jason Mullins move out of Tennessee. problem solved
Way better than my teacher!! Thank you!
Eminent Domain should be illegal.
If it was, we probably wouldn't have railroads, interstates or airports.
No, eminent domain is okay, as long as the property owner gets fully compensated ("just compensation") for his land.
What _should_ be illegal is civil asset forfeiture, which allows the government to take your property _without_ Due Process and _without_ Just Compensation. _Even if you haven't committed a crime!_
That is an abomination, and it should be outlawed by constitutional amendment, but it happens every day throughout the nation. Read the U.S. Supreme Court case of _Bennis v. Michigan,_ 516 U.S. 442 (1996), where the court allowed an innocent woman's car to be seized and forfeited by the government. It's outrageous.
Listening to your channel is the right thing to do
*Random drug testing and DUI checkpoints violate the spirit of this right*
Many scholars agree.
my class in school loves your videos
Love the Chris farley reference..lol
I occasionally do, but not on those. I love all those Clarence Thomas insights and pointed questions during oral arguments. (lol)
I like your content and I believe its especially valuable for our young students ( everyone else too) to know they're rights however I think you should perhaps do an update on some of these laws/ supreme court cases that you have mentioned are out of date and have changed. For instance "Stop and Frisk" significant changes and also officers forcing you to provide an ID just because "they say so" is unlawful.
4A
I'm confused. Doesn't finding evidence unlawfully for the grand jury fall back on the 4th amendment?
Yeah. No illegal or unauthorized searches or seizures
I have a world history playlist on my YT page, but its only 14 vids. Try Mr. Klaff. Good "global regents klaff" And look at the Crash Course vids!
Ha! I cut that part, I made the distinction between criminal and civil trials but yeah.... I went from 25 minutes down to 13, I am finding out its not good to make 67 minute videos.
Did Stumpf have to answer warrens questions? Could he have remained silent?
Miranda Rights are a key part of "Due Process".
If your land is taken you shoud be paid what its worth to future investors. Obviously if they are taking it from you, its worth more to you than whats being offered and worth more to them than what they are giving due to the land being forcible removed from your possesion. One of many fucked things about the us government
Thank you, this helped to understand why those old men were yelling 'FIFTH' in current happenings.
Can anyone tell me if the music in the background was from "the greatest american hero" tv show?
You are wrong about the Blockburger rule, the court ruling is the opposite of what you claimed. The rule is that even if crimes are tied, if the crimes violate distinct statutory provisions and each require additional proof which the other does not, then they must be tried as separate and distinct violation of the law.
What song
I find it interesting, how unwittingly any of us can slip into a tyrannical mode when conviction in our sense of being right is running high.
I know you said it was mandatory to show over your ID, but......
Can you be asked for your ID without probable cause/reason for suspicion?
Yes, and you have to provide it. You do not have to answer any further questions, but you have to answer the question of who you are, and provide ID if it is requested
There are two basic levels in the U.S legal system: Federal Law vs. State Law. A federal law applies to the nation as a whole and to all 50 states “We the People as a Government” whereas state laws are in effect within that particular state, Control and Run by the Democratic Party’s. Your Driver's License is a Contract signed by you; for you to drive on a public road - this is a privilege, not a right - But under United States Federal Laws, you have the right to travel on a public road. Under the Authority of the United States Constitution We the People, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby… So remember the next time an officer is demands your driver's License in Hand, waving your fundamental right away, for a privilege, not a right… A driver’s License requirements’ is a Learner's Permit. Sixteen and 17-year-olds starting out on the public road right of way or that you work for congress as a public servant, as bus driver or truck driver etc. no need for a license other than that, no need for a license to “travel” from point a to point b on public road ways that your tax-dollars paid for, it’s a right, not a privilege, stand up for freedom… The Bill Of Rights is part of the 10 Constitution of the United States nation as a whole… Federal law will always supersede state law when the person in question stands to gain more from the Federal law… The Constitution supreme Law of the Land; Remember, if an officer demands your driver's license, you are required by state law to hand over your “Contract” license to an officer, only if you have committed a crime, waving your fundamental rights away, for a privilege, not a right, or go to jail? If you are pulled over by a police officer for a traffic offense, you are always in a Custody arrest; you are going to jail or a ticket. Just say, Officer, Can any of the information that you are demanding from me be used against me in a court of law or to potentially incriminate me in any way? (Just knowing it will) Follow up. I invoke my 5th Amendment right to not hand over information to be a Witness against myself in a court of Law. Follow up. I invoke my 5th Amendment right to not answer any questions without an attorney present. “I don’t answer questions” Follow up, I invoke My Miranda Rights, I want my lawyer, or am I free to go? By signing a traffic ticket; you are only promising to show up in court. A police officer who suspects a driver is under the influence of alcohol or drugs (DUI or DWI) will typically administer various tests, the officer might start with field sobriety tests (FSTs) and then ask the driver to submit to a blood, breath, or urine test. Just say, Officer, Can this field sobriety tests be used against me in a court of law or to potentially incriminate me in any way? Follow up. This been said, Invoke My Miranda Rights, I want my lawyer or am I free to go? The 5th Amendment gives you the right, from being a Witness against yourself in a court of Law. Under Custody arrest you go to jail. If an officer is arresting you in handcuffs, just say, Officer, I must inform you, what you are about to do… This is an Unlawful Arrest; you are attempting to kidnap me… I invoke my 5th Amendment right, No person shall be . . . deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law... This is an illegal kidnaping, I want my lawyer, or am I free to go?
Yes, Mr. Hughes, I have an expectation of privacy when I send someone and email or call someone. The NSA is an Orwellian nightmare.
That's the Fourth Amendment.
good video. helped me understand the 5th amendment for a test tomorrow. subscribed.
The taking clause when applied to commercial use for the "greater good of the community" is unconstitutional, in my opinion. I would argue that the "greater good of the community" would be a persons right to their own property in said community. Natural rights come before political law.
This is good to learn
Dude looking like Tom Arnold and Lewis Black had a baby.
Is the constitution applied also to foreign citizens legally in U.S.?
lucderan
Yes the entire constitution applies to everyone except for specific citizenship concepts.
one of the reasons about why ANY checkpoint should be illegal
Checkpoints are unconstitutional. They made "exceptions" for checkpoints. The grounds for the exceptions do not stand up in a true court of law, without bogus "exceptions". They are infringing on my right to travel without being molested.
Nick Diaz - fifth amendment
if it dont fit...you must acquit!
He should be on Shark Tank as an Investor Judge
No way, outrageous ! No public domain for commerce. Unconstitutional certainly...
I'm working on a case rite now, and it's 15 years old in Georgia. Now what or how does one bring the double jeopardy claim when the prosecutor has indicted once to a grand jury then a year later indicts again using the same exact information times and locations on the 2nd indictment again.
Basically going to 2 different grand juries with the same info but adding a charge and indicting again
Double Jeopardy applies only to trials, not grand jury indictments.
using the right to remain silent also cannot be taken as incriminatory in and of itself. this right is frequently broken these days, because someone will not speak, or someone will not allow a search, it is taken as being suspicious. a sad place that law enforcement has sunk to.
The government took my 2 1/2 acres that I received from my father‘s inheritance to me. I heard I have 30 years to fight it. It sounds to me like the fifth amendment writing. Although I’ve already had chief justice William Rehnquist rule in my favour.
I argued in the affirmative for emminent domain in high school debate club many years ago, but didn't remember that it is part of the Fifth Amendment. Thanks for the refresher course.
I wish I would have known this before I disturbed the peace
_Isn’t the police officer taking your license a seizure can’t I invoke the fourth amendment for that_
Thanks again
Miranda is custody, not detainment. In California at least.
did you just say: *if WE are going to arrest YOU?*
Only one min in atm. Had a question. What do you personally think about the NDAA and the supposed destruction of due process?
you are saving my life rn haha
+Camila Maric actually I think you're saving your own life.
Keith Hughes 😂
"nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself"
What about herself?
In written English, himself is sometimes used to refer to a person without saying whether that person is a man or a woman.
This Amendment pretty much worked in favor for OJ.
Property is not just land, this guy added to the text
call me a dummy Because I am not ashamed
This guy knows damn good and well the difference between twerking and tweaking
This is good for you
You got a thumbs up exclusively for the Farley joke but everything else was cherry too.
If it's always by jury, what does the judge do?
Among other things, judges conduct the trial, make rulings as to the admissibility of evidence, and instruct the jury on what the applicable law is and how to apply it to the facts of the case.
You just earned a Veteran subscriber.
I have a question Relating to double jeopardy, if a person is tried and proven innocent but later there is evidence showing they committed the crime can they be sent to prison ?
No
I don’t see how the ID isn’t effectively answering a question. Makes no sense. That should be disputed. I don’t even carry a wallet when I’m out walking. Why should I tell these guys my name?
Double Jeopardy = Criminals best friend law. lol.
So, does these Amendments only work for the people born in USA and US citizens?
When did Drew Carey start doing law videos??
If you rob a meth van you might wish you got arrested because the meth van might blow up.
To me if you live in a country that can confiscate your property for comercial reasons than you no longer live in a republic, but in a corporation. Imagine you have land you could build a casino on that will employ 100 people, someone comes with a plan to build a hospital there that will employ 300 people, your land gets confiscated, you dont get paid the potentintial value, you loose, (you might even get paid less than would be one year earnings of that casino you planned) now the coporation that bought your confiscated land, declares,their investor no longer will support a hospital build, and they build a casion there, they just got your land discounted for the same reason, their ROI would be just amazing, and there is no way these schemes can be prevented.
awesome
thank you so much for the explanation..... as you said "chopped down very well" ha ha ha ha any way THANKS.
+dakotail u betcha
So this gose against Solsiom? The 5 Amendment.
DID YOU KNOW YOU HAD RIGHTS well so do I let Saul handle your case
Do you know anything I should study for global regents ? It's the last one I really need
My fifth amendment right was violated by the police of long island 3rd precinct on 2/19/2015. 1:04 pm.
Were you resisting arrest?
M
@keithHuges I need to talk to you your so smart
EVOKE YOUR RIGHT TO AN LAWYER
No... And I mean No. You do not have to ID unless they have Probable cause of a crime. 6:30 What? How is IDing going to help that there is a crime a foot?
By the way, the cop got fired but that doesn't mean the a civil suit can't be filed.
Nor to witness against himself. Basically their body cams were a check and balance on them. Do something about them. Body cams.
Yes, you are protected from double jeopardy. But now, you can be taken to civil court after been found innocent in the previous trial.
Yes, but that's a totally different thing.
A criminal case is the *Government* prosecuting the defendant, and if the government wins, you can be put in prison.
A civil case is a private lawsuit by a *private individual* or organization, and if the plaintiff wins, you can't be sent to jail. The worst that can happen is that you'll have to pay money.
Furthermore, the standard of proof is very different. While in a criminal case, the government must prove your guilt by proof beyond a reasonable doubt, in a civil case, the plaintiff only needs to prove that you are liable for damages by a preponderance of the evidence -- that is, it's only necessary for the plaintiff to prove that it's *more likely than not* that you did whatever you're accused of. That's a much weaker (easier to meet) standard.
So it might be that in a given situation, there is not enough evidence to prove that a person is guilty _beyond a reasonable doubt,_ but the evidence is strong enough for a jury to say that he "probably" did it (that is, that it's more likely than not).
Persons detained do not have to be read the Miranda warning. Persons arrested do.
as long as you don't forget that you can always make more videos about a topic =P
Is there similar right in Indian constitution?
Me gustan tus videos aprendiendo inglrs con tus videos
Kelo vs NL - for commercial reaons?? I dont think that was the founding fathers intent for em. domain. It would have to be of Immense value to the city to be even considered imho, but im sure thats not how it plays out across usa in the real world
I am at an understanding that anyone can represent u legally if u trust them to do so and not just a member of the BAR am I wrong
You are wrong.
what is the conferment of states