Bill Of Rights Vs Fifth Amendment

1242 Words 5 Pages
The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land made up of the 7 articles and the U.S. Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights is a document with a group of Amendments, which are articles added to the U.S Constitution. The Fifth Amendment was introduced into the U.S Constitution on September 5th, 1789. The five clauses within the Fifth Amendment stay consistent with the meaning of the Bill of Rights in that they promote a balance between the people and the government, and limits on government power and procedure. The Fifth Amendment contains five protections vital to a person accused of crime; the right to Grand Jury, to double jeopardy charges, compelled self-incrimination, due process, and just compensation. This paper will address the right …show more content…
Because so many rights were based on theories or strong beliefs by men such as John Locke and Thomas Paine, people could be tortured in custody for not confessing because they had little rights. Due to these wild government procedures, English citizens stood up against this injustice and created the basis for the self-incrimination clause, claiming they had a God given right not to testify in these situations. These simple actions of uprising were the basis for what is known as the right to go against testifying against oneself, which America's Founding Fathers formalized as a clause in the Fifth …show more content…
The clause extends to local and state jurisdictions as well as the Supreme Court, and when exercising this right it is often referred to as “pleading the fifth.” One of the biggest changes is that the Supreme Court ruled that the clause applies not only on trial but during police interrogations as well. Now, exercising the right can be during legal proceedings or while in police custody. This way a person in police custody may refuse to answer questions about the crime they are allegedly convicted of, so in custodial interrogation. Then this person can have a backup if the police want to question them, because they are guaranteed that someone informs them of their Miranda warnings. However, this only applies when the suspect is in custody. According to GetLegal.com, if both elements are not present, the police are not required to give Miranda warnings. Many landmark cases have addressed and debated over what the true meaning of "custody" and "interrogation," however the main definition to go by is that custody means to be arrested. Therefore, the standard a court will apply is objective as they give a fair choice, where they will ask whether the average person is aware of the circumstances and of their rights but would have felt free to leave the scene and remain silent. If the answer is no, the suspect is put in

Related Documents