Somehow I must have missed the part of the article that indicated the defendant was compelled to be a witness against himself in court.
I guess it must be there somewhere. Can you show me that from the article?
Witness; Def #3: to bear witness to; testify to; give or afford evidence of.
If his silence, and his speech, both can be used to give or afford evidence of
his guilt, then there is no way that he cannot but witness against himself. Period.
I guess it must be there somewhere. Can you show me that from the article?