On Sun, 10 Dec 1995, Bill Stewart wrote:

At 02:57 AM 12/10/95 -0800, you wrote:

...

The Fifth protects you against *compelled* self-incrimination - in particular, the right to be free from the "cruel trilemma" of

o conviction of a substantive crime, based on your (true) testimony o conviction of perjury, for lying when asked to incriminate yourself o contempt of court sanctions, for refusing to answer

Testimony was often compelled by more direct means than threatened contempt citations. Piling rocks on people until they talked was still in use in the 1600s, unless I've got my dates wrong.

And later. The term 'pressing a defendant for a plea' came from the practice of piling heavy weights on a defendant and 'pressing' him into the very floor of the court. (As defendants who did not admit a plea would save their family from being held accountable to judgment, the incentive to remain silent was high). Often weight was piled atop the hapless defendant until he or she expired, having refused to enter a plea.

It may have gone out of fashion slightly after witch-burning, but was still in recent cultural memory of the Constitution's authors. #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, Freelance Information Architect, stewarts@ix.netcom.com # Phone +1-510-247-0663 Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281

--- My prefered and soon to be permanent e-mail address: unicorn@schloss.li "In fact, had Bancroft not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est Franklin might have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti 00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information