Dede pleads the Fifth in Kyron civil case
The constitutional privilege against self-incrimination is interesting. Nothing makes you look as guilty as when you invoke it. As one of my law professors explained, it's just common sense that leads people to the conclusion that the person claiming the privilege is guilty. For example, say you have three children, and an empty cookie jar. You sternly ask them, "Who took the cookies?" The first one says, "Not me." The second one says, "Not me." The third one says, "I'm asserting my Fifth Amendment right." Hmmmm...
We ponder that professor's wise observation as we read this story about the Kyron Horman case -- another failure of local law enforcement that may actually get fixed with the help of a civil trial lawyer.
| Posted at 6:24 PM | Permalink |
|
Comments (14)
So give her immunity. It seems obvious the step mom is the main person in the crime.
If it gets the fathre some peace in knowing what happened to his son and secondarily helps to impose something a little harsher than having Terri be silent, I'd roll the dice.
Posted by Steve | October 23, 2012 6:37 PM
I don't think the stepmom could have killed him and buried him without help. The cops and the DA probably aren't going to let an accomplice go if they were there when the body went into the ground.
Posted by Jack Bog | October 23, 2012 6:41 PM
Go get em, Elden!!!
Posted by Brendan | October 23, 2012 6:53 PM
Compare and contrast the photos of De De in 2010 and 2012.
The DA should check the woods near De De's home to make sure Hansel and Gretel are not locked up in a cage awaiting a horrible fate.
I'm guessing she has gained 100 pounds in two years.
Posted by ltjd | October 23, 2012 7:15 PM
Still freaked out by the juicer-era pictures of Horman as a body-builder. I hear that stuff can make you violent and impulsive.
I hope this is a way of asking for immunity, and that the truth comes out. Heck, I still hold out some hope that the kid is alive somewhere.
Posted by Downtown Denizen | October 23, 2012 7:47 PM
Steve -
Unlike the feds Oregon doesn't have a "use immunity" statute. Oregon can only "give her immunity" if the State AG and the DAs of every county in which an alleged criminal act took place agree in writing to not prosecute Dede for whatever.
So, line up Multnomah, certainly Washington, and what other counties - your guess is as good as mine, but I think probably Columbia, too - and the State AG.
It ain't gonna' happen.
Posted by Nonny Mouse | October 23, 2012 8:01 PM
ltjd:
It's actually only 65 lbs. in four years - by her own admission in the deposition (p. 45). And she's only 5'3".
Maybe she should have taken the Fifth on that question, too.
Posted by Rob B | October 23, 2012 9:23 PM
That interpretation of the 5th Amendment is pretty wacky.
A criminal conviction has to be based upon evidence. You're implying that refusal to testify is tantamount to evidence.
We also have a constitutional protection against double jeopardy: you cannot be re-tried for a crime if you've been acquitted. A quick look at Wikipedia shows this is hardly universal. Would you also like to dump this bit of the US Constitution.
I was once foreman of a grand jury, swearing in witness after witness, and I feel pretty confident that a number of them lied. Quite frankly, I wish some of them had refused to testify--would have been a lot less frustrating for the grand jurors.
Posted by Joel Dan Walls | October 23, 2012 9:24 PM
Who the heck is interpreting the Fifth Amendment here? Nobody! I'm talking about common sense -- how it looks. How the public reacts. Not what's admissible in court.
It's one of the great joys of the internet to be criticized for saying something you never said. Thanks for the jury duty story, though.
Posted by Jack Bog | October 23, 2012 9:45 PM
Pleading the Fifth can be a noble thing in certain circumstances, such as a response to a witchhunt. When it's invoked by potential suspects in a potential murder case, not so much.
Posted by reader | October 23, 2012 10:02 PM
aka invoking one's right to remain silent, which has a less sinister ring to it..
and it's not a bad strategy — a jury may put two and two together, but they'll never hear about it in court.
Posted by Zach | October 24, 2012 1:06 AM
The O has a link to transcript. I know she is following lawyerly advice, but out of 142 questions, including pleading "the fif" about ever doing an interview with freaking People Magazine, the last question sent chills up my spine:
Q: Do you know whether Kyron Horman is alive?
A: I'm asserting my Fifth Amendment right.
Posted by St Johns Flasher | October 24, 2012 6:05 AM
"the last question sent chills up my spine:"
I think the btter question she didn't answer:
Do you know if Kyron Horman is missing?
I wonder is Houze is coaching her also.
Posted by Steve | October 24, 2012 6:28 AM
The 5th amendment right to remain silent is the anti coercion/torture statute. Periods in the US, and other countries, where this protection is not enforced leads to frequent abuse of those in custody and gobs of false confessions.
Those that are guilty end up confessing the vast majority of the time anyway, or saying something that gets them convicted. In the big scheme of things it hardly shields the guilty. I'll point to the millions of people in prison as solid evidence of this.
If you do remain silent about where a little kid might be, and how/if he died, then you are guilty as hell. They might not get you in court, but in the court of public opinion you might as well have confessed.
Anyone see any reason this lady shouldn't share a holding cell with the other two guys Jack has blogged about recently?
Posted by Jo | October 24, 2012 8:41 AM