Althouse: Wife privilege.

१० मार्च, २०१६

Wife privilege.

"Camille Cosby refused to answer questions at least 98 times, citing marital or attorney-client privilege, during a contentious deposition that became public when a transcript was filed earlier this week in a federal court in Massachusetts."

२१ टिप्पण्या:

Dude1394 म्हणाले...: I do not recall Lois Lerner being so grilled.; १०/३/१६, ९:०४ AM
traditionalguy म्हणाले...: Somehow a man who dates rapes hundreds of young, vulnerable single women over 30 years using Roofies to render them unconscious at his place, should not be taking advantage of Marital Privilege.; १०/३/१६, ९:०४ AM
MadisonMan म्हणाले...: Prosecutors must have known she'd say nothing, so what's the point here of grilling the old lady?

Underscoring what cretins lawyers are? Angry that Bill Cosby has eluded them, prosecutors take it out on his wife.

And what Unknown said, times a billion.; १०/३/१६, ९:१७ AM
MadisonMan म्हणाले...: ('Prosecutor' in the very broad sense of course); १०/३/१६, ९:२० AM
kjbe म्हणाले...: MM, she has information. You have to ask.; १०/३/१६, ९:२० AM
Danno म्हणाले...: She should have been instructed to say, "I don't recall." to every question that is sensitive.; १०/३/१६, ९:३० AM
MadisonMan म्हणाले...: @kjbe, I think the first question should have been: Will you be telling us anything of value today?

Answer: No.

Then call it a day.

But this way, many lawyers got to charge different clients for many hours' work. Win!; १०/३/१६, ९:३४ AM
traditionalguy म्हणाले...: Well we could water board her. She is a family of a terrorist, sort of. Let's ask President Trump.; १०/३/१६, ९:४२ AM
cubanbob म्हणाले...: Hillary certainly has been given wife privilege. It would be racist to deny the same privileged to Camille Crosby.; १०/३/१६, ९:५४ AM
Curious George म्हणाले...: Did they ask her if she knew if her husband had told one of his victims that she "better put some ice on that?"

Oh, sorry. Wrong rapist's wife.; १०/३/१६, ९:५६ AM
JT म्हणाले...: I'd like Professor Althouse to weigh in here. I didn't think spouses could be compelled to testify against each other. In fact, I seem to recall Aaron Hernandez wanting to marry his longtime girlfriend while he was in the slammer awaiting trial for murder for this very reason.

What are the legal precedents here, Professor?; १०/३/१६, १०:०६ AM
YoungHegelian म्हणाले...: And a witness in a courtroom taking full advantage of rights guaranteed her under our legal system is a problem exactly how?; १०/३/१६, १०:१२ AM
Doug म्हणाले...: Traditionalguy said: Somehow a man who dates rapes hundreds of young, vulnerable single women over 30 years using Roofies to render them unconscious at his place, should not be taking advantage of Marital Privilege. The "somehow" being to suspend the Constitution for guys you don't like. Yeah, I said "guys".; १०/३/१६, १०:२४ AM
boycat म्हणाले...: Marital privilege is not a Constitutional right.; १०/३/१६, १०:४३ AM
mikee म्हणाले...: Yet Hillary is still considered a viable Presidential candidate.; १०/३/१६, १२:३५ PM
अनामित म्हणाले...: IIRC, a judge ruled that Camille could be deposed because she had been involved with managing his career, but private marital communications with her husband would be off-limits.; १०/३/१६, १:१७ PM
Mountain Maven म्हणाले...: The Hillary Clinton of comedians wives.; १०/३/१६, ४:०८ PM
JAORE म्हणाले...: "Marital privilege is not a Constitutional right."

Yet it has been recognized by the Supreme Court. Another penumbra?; १०/३/१६, ४:४५ PM
JAORE म्हणाले...: "Somehow a man who dates rapes hundreds of young, vulnerable single women over 30 years using Roofies to render them unconscious at his place, should not be taking advantage of Marital Privilege. "

Left off that little detail of "accused of...".

So, if a guy is accused of sale of [lots and lots of] drugs to "young, vulnerable" high school kids, we should suspend the search and seizure rules?; १०/३/१६, ४:५१ PM
hombre म्हणाले...: They have the anti-marital fact privilege in federal court. How does a judge order her to appear as a witness against her husband? US v. White, 9th Circuit, 1992.

Oh, I forgot, judges don't have to follow the law in politically correct lawsuits.; १०/३/१६, ६:५२ PM
hombre म्हणाले...: Somebody wrote that the judge ordered her to testify because she had been involved in managing his career.

The anti-marital fact privilege is not based on the potential testimony. One spouse cannot be compelled to testify against another during the duration of the marriage and the privilege can be exercised by either spouse.

Probably a Clinton or Obama appointee. They are, of course, above the law.; १०/३/१६, ७:१५ PM