Re:Apple’s “warrant canary” disappears
by eridius on Thursday September 18, 2014 @02:31PM
(#8336833)
The law doesn't work like that. There is no "precedence". If you are forced to choose between lying under oath, or saying something you're not allowed to say, you're going to have to take the punishment either way. Any judge will recognize that you put yourself in this situation and therefore you are responsible for the outcome.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
No in the US you can plead the 5th and simply not respond.
Re:Apple’s “warrant canary” disappears
by eridius on Thursday September 18, 2014 @07:57PM
(#8338334)
Corporations cannot plead the 5th. That only applies to individuals. And it only applies when there is any reason to believe there is a risk of self-incrimination.
So yes, if you are in a circumstance where pleading the 5th is allowed, then you may plead the 5th and therefore not comment. But in the case of a corporation, or in the case of circumstances where you may not plead the 5th, then you cannot escape punishment by asserting that you are in a catch-22.
As Mitt Romney was fond of saying, "corporations are people"
Re:Apple’s “warrant canary” disappears
by eridius on Thursday September 18, 2014 @09:09PM
(#8338537)
Sure, and legally in many ways corporations are people. But in this specific case, corporations do not enjoy the protections of the 5th amendment.
Re:Apple’s “warrant canary” disappears
by anonbanker on Sunday September 21, 2014 @11:44AM
(#8347397)
[Citation needed]
I learned it from The Illustrated Guide to Law, which is a webcomic about law written and illustrated by a criminal defense lawyer.
The page that states this is http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=2600, though the next couple of pages are relevant as well.