[P-Marlowe]

The Judge made a horrible mistake by ignoring the mans rights regardless of the Miranda.

Here is the text of the Fifth Amendment.

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

Can you explain to me how the judge violated this guy's fifth amendment rights when he allowed the jury to consider his silence in the face of the fact that he had just killed an 8 year old girl as evidence of his state of mind at the time of the accident?

Are you perhaps reading something into that amendment that isn't really there?

[RetiredTexasVet]

Silence is not “evidence” except with His Arrogance and Eric “The Corrupt” Holder or other supporters of communism.

[Talisker]

Can you explain to me how the judge violated this guy's fifth amendment rights when he allowed the jury to consider his silence in the face of the fact that he had just killed an 8 year old girl as evidence of his state of mind at the time of the accident?

Simple - without definitive contextual meaning, there is literally no possible way to make such a determination. What if he was in shock? Drunk? Trained or habituated not to say anything to police in order to protect his rights? Frightened? Confused? Feeling persecuted?

I mean really, how can this even be asked? The very reason for the existence of the Fifth Amendment is the abiding fact of these undeterminable possibilities, and the fact that they have been so abused across the centuries. Not to mention that he had no obligation to understand the fine legal points of his silence, when the very subject had risen in contention to the level of the Supreme Court. The fact that there is a dissenting opinion on the Court proves right there that a trained legal mind of the highest rank would have done exactly what he did in remaining silent. So how, in his case, does it turn into depravity?

[glyptol]

Perhaps you are reading something into my statements that isn’t there. Where did I mention the 5th?