Any lawyers here....Fifth Amendment in civil suits???

[Tyler Durden]

Hi all,

I read how the family of that murdered Border Patrol Agent is suing the .gov or maybe just certain members of the .gov for wrongful death.

Let's say, for example, Eric Holder is called to the witness stand during these lawsuit proceedings, can he still pull an Ollie North and claim the Fifth?

Can he be compelled to testify?

[Hazcat]

Nope, the fifth amendment is in effect in civil suits. BTW, not a lawyer but I am sure of this.

[Timothy]

I don't know the answer as to the 5th but I do know that in a civil suit, there is no "reasonable doubt" issue!  All the plaintiff has to prove is that the .gov COULD be culpable in the death.

Remember the OJ civil suit by the Brown family?

[Solus]

I think it is a bit more than just could be culpable.  I think it reads   "preponderance of evidence"  which would mean that there is enough evidence to show that the government is most likely guilty.

Any one who is present in a room when something is stolen could be the one who took it....but I doubt any of them would be convicted without further evidence.

[tombogan03884]

I think it is a bit more than just could be culpable.  I think it reads   "preponderance of evidence"  which would mean that there is enough evidence to show that the government is most likely guilty.

Any one who is present in a room when something is stolen could be the one who took it....but I doubt any of them would be convicted without further evidence.

You're talking about 2 different types of law.
The standard of proof is much lower in a civil case than in a criminal case.
That's how John Edwards made his fortune in "personal injury" cases.

[Sponsor]

[Timothy]

You're talking about 2 different types of law.
The standard of proof is much lower in a civil case than in a criminal case.
That's how John Edwards made his fortune in "personal injury" cases.

Correct!  The Browns didn't have to prove OJ killed their daughter and her friend.  They just had to convince the jury that he PROBABLY killed them!  They awarded the Browns 30+ million dollars I think!  No one will go to jail in a civil case!

[tombogan03884]

Correct!  The Browns didn't have to prove OJ killed their daughter and her friend. HIS EX-WIFE AND THEIR SON They just had to convince the jury that he PROBABLY killed them!  They awarded the Browns 30+ million dollars I think!  No one will go to jail in a civil case!

FIFY 

[Timothy]

Actually, she was a Brown, he was a Goldman.  Both families sued together as I recall.

[Solus]

Correct!  The Browns didn't have to prove OJ killed their daughter and her friend.  They just had to convince the jury that he PROBABLY killed them!  They awarded the Browns 30+ million dollars I think!  No one will go to jail in a civil case!

I understand the difference....   I was making the point that  Probably did requires more proof than Could have

In a criminal case "beyond a reasonable doubt" is requred.

In a civil case a "preponderance of evidence" is required...which is pretty far beyond "could have"

[Tyler Durden]

as far as burden of proof, as I understand it, there are 12 jurors in a criminal trial.  the prosecution has to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

if just one juror is the lone hold out, then he/she represents reasonable doubt, and they can't convict.

in a civil case, juror numbers 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 could be hold outs, but I guess the 7 other jurors could represent the majority or the preponderance of the evidence.

well, crap, I was hoping that Holder was going to have to spill the beans at this wrongful death suit.