4 votes

5Th Amendment and the Right to Not Incriminate Yourself, NSA or Not

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury,...nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself..."

I have never been convicted of any crime ever. Yet the Federal Government digitally stores my fingerprints, retinal scan, biometric data, and all forms of my digital communications. I do not consent to the Federal Government having any of this information in their possession because I have the Constitutional Right Not to incriminate myself and 4Th Amendment rights. Should I one day commit a crime, any digital information the Federal Government has on me may be used to convict me in a court of law, or Not.

Any digital information generated from my person belongs to me and I will demand any and all of that information can't be admissible in a court of law if it was gathered prior to my arrest or indictment. Only the digital information and physical information from the point in time of an indictment or arrest against me, gathered on me using a warrant going forward from that point in time, can be used against me in a court of law, in combination with my 5TH Amendment rights.

A better understanding of the 5TH Amendment and how it comes into play here should help iron out these NSA efficacy data collection problems.

Should there be a statute of limitations on the digital information the government can keep and store on you, if any at all?

What difference does it make if they can't use the previously collected data against you in a court of law, which begs the question, so why waste taxpayer money collecting it on you in the first place.

It all comes dowe to the time date stamp on the file, when it was created on you, that can be found in the properties tab on the data file. If it was created before the warrant date, then all that information in that file is inadmissible in a court of law.

Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_...



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I believe this legal argument

I believe this legal argument can be their Achilles Heal.

The wiretap violates

the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 9th, and possibly the 10th.

...we might as well say it violates hammurabi's code, the magna carta, the bible, and science.

-quiet engineer

Issues to consider

1) Legally, the data they are collecting and storing doesn't exist and they are not collecting it and storing it. (Even though of course they are.) Hence, LEGALLY, how did they have it before they were authorized by warrant to have it, since legally it doesn't exist? If you introduce evidence to the contrary, it will be classified and sealed under national security law.

2) At least currently, they aren't using the blanket surveillance data against people IN COURT. But they DO use it to know where to look to get evidence to bring to court. Further, they use it extra legally to mess with your finances, your telecom, your friends, family, job, reputation, to stalk you in person, etc etc.

3) In the future, of course, it will be used against you legally, no differently than forced confessions were used against Soviet citizens and their families in star courts. It's inevitable.

4) Lastly AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, the data is not to have to "get" you in court, it's to blackmail you and CONTROL YOU, as you are under threat that your past sins, even if you've repented and changed genuinely, can and will be used against you FOR EVER AND EVER.
http://www.dailypaul.com/288584#comment-3103273

Agree with your line of thinking...

However, since they are trashing the 4th amendment - why should we assume that they would honor the 5th amendment - particularly in case of suspected "terrorism" (or enemy combatant)?
We are losing our liberties one by one.

A wall of text here, but I

A wall of text here, but I tried to keep the notion as short as possible.

Should there be a statute of limitations on the digital information the government can keep and store on you, if any at all?

What difference does it make if they can't use the previously collected data against you in a court of law, which begs the question, so why waste taxpayer money collecting it on you in the first place.

Awesome post.

"Should there be a statute of limitations on the digital information the government can keep and store on you, if any at all?"

You answered your own question: They have NO right to keep/retain information at all. If one is suspected, a search warrant then must be issued, while still retaining 5th and other Amendment rights. It is THEY who have the burden.

This thing wreaks of thought crime and elimination of natural-born/God-given rights in a totalitarian society, where corporate/private elitists decide who will serve and who will pay to fund their profits.

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul