Salinas v. Texas, in a 2013, 5-4, ruling by the US Supreme Court that is precisely how it works today! Prior to being taken into custody and being Mirandized, you must invoke the fifth to use it. The suspect did not invoke and therefore his silence could be construed as guilt!I do not think that is how the 5th amendment works
Wait: so you mean you must say "I plead the 5th" before they read you your rights? I've been told before when pulled over for ANY reason, don't give any info. For example. I was stopped for supposedly doing a California stop at a 4 way stop, (I didn't b/c I saw the cop car hiding a mile away and made sure to stop) and the cop asks me where I'm going. I asked why he pulled me over and he pressed about the "where were you going thing." I said I didn't have to answer that question as it had nothing to do with anything. He immediately got nasty. I just answered his further questioning with one word answers.
Yes that is precisely what the new ruling means. We have to proactively assert them anytime prior to being Mirandized. When should someone claim privilege, or the ever popular question should you claim it at all, are all hard calls to make and left to the individual as only they know if there could be an issue of self-incrimination. But you obviously did it right, you drove away and that is success in my book.
Oh I'd claim it all right. Fuck self-incrimination. I have learned the HARD way never to give ANY info at all. Can and will be misconstrued, so incriminating myself by pleading the 5th is the lesser of the two evils by far. My question was more about how technical do you have to be? In other words, if they begin reading you your rights do you interrupt with "I plead the 5th." ?
If I were in a bad mood I'd ask about probable cause for the stop then I'd plead the fifth if he said anything other than you ran the stop. Say it as close to the beginning of the conversation as you can. After that you've called them. They either cut you loose or do a shit load of paperwork.
