News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Chelsea Manning Can Remain in Jail for Another Year, Judge Rules. Parent comment

Re:Chelsea Manning Can Remain in Jail for Another Year, Judg... by magduf on Wednesday August 07, 2019 @01:06PM (#20636644)
What does this have to do with anything?

If you're on trial for murder, the prosecution would never call on you to testify. Why would they? Of course you're going to claim that you didn't do it. Your testimony would be useless.

Murderers are tried with physical evidence linking them to the crime, and witness testimony from other people. Murderers don't even need to be present to be convicted; this happens sometimes if they're considered a danger in the courtroom, or have fled.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Chelsea Manning Can Remain in Jail for Another Year, Judg... by mikeash on Wednesday August 07, 2019 @01:38PM (#20636954)
The comment I replied to disputed the general notion that courts need to be able to compel behavior.

From a quick search, it appears that a trial in the US cannot begin without the defendant present, although it may proceed if they leave afterwards depending on circumstances.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Chelsea Manning Can Remain in Jail for Another Year, Judg... by magduf on Wednesday August 07, 2019 @07:59PM (#20640501)
I don't think that's true: they have something called "trial in absentia". It doesn't happen often though.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Chelsea Manning Can Remain in Jail for Another Year, Judg... by mikeash on Wednesday August 07, 2019 @08:30PM (#20640702)
I’m aware. The fact that there’s a name for it doesn’t mean it’s allowed in the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_in_absentia
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Chelsea Manning Can Remain in Jail for Another Year, Judg... by noobiemcfoob on Wednesday August 07, 2019 @01:54PM (#20637109)
Can a court coerce a murder witness to testimony with imprisonment?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Chelsea Manning Can Remain in Jail for Another Year, Judg... by magduf on Thursday August 08, 2019 @11:24AM (#20645396)
In the US, no. The 5th Amendment protects defendants from being coerced into self-incrimination. I was just pointing out how his comment really made no sense here at all, since this article isn't about a criminal being coerced into testifying against themselves (which again is illegal per the 5A), but rather a witness being coerced into testifying when they don't want to for some reason.
[ Parent | on HN ]