The Short ConstitutionWade, Martin J. (Martin Joseph)
History
The Short Constitution
Wade, Martin J. (Martin Joseph)
United States. Constitution
If a person confesses to having committed a crime and the facts as
stated are found to be correct, he may then be convicted of the
crime, but the conviction is made on the basis of the evidence
disclosed by his confession and not on the confession itself. Having
made a confession the officers may then from the facts told by the
accused find other facts sufficient to convict without offering the
confession in evidence.
“A confession is not admissible in evidence where it is obtained by
temporal inducement, by threats, promise or hope of favor held out
to the party in respect of his escape from the charge against him,
by a person in authority.”—Bouvier’s _Law Dictionary_, Vol. I, p.
387.
“When an inducement destroys a confession it must be held out by a
person in authority.”
64 Constitution of the United States, Amendment V.
This is a part of the fifth amendment to the Federal Constitution,
and the fourteenth is an expansion of it, and assumes that the man
charged with the crime is innocent until proven guilty. The old
standard set in Europe was that a person charged with crime was
considered guilty until he was proven innocent. All citizens,
whether native or foreign born, have the protection of this
amendment.—Bouvier’s _Law Dictionary_, Vol. I, p. 622.
Previous to 1679 in England an accused person could be detained in
prison for months or even for years and had no recourse to the
courts, but might be thus detained in prison upon a mere charge
brought by some one jealous of him and without real reason. In that
year the people demanded that Parliament should give relief against
unjust or false imprisonment, and Parliament enacted the Habeas
Corpus Act. The provisions of this notable act require that a person
imprisoned may demand a preliminary hearing and learn the cause of
his being seized and imprisoned. Either he or his friends or
relatives could go before a judge of a court and demand a _writ of
habeas corpus_. Such writ was issued by a judge and directed to the
jailer or the person detaining the accused and he was compelled to
bring the accused person before the court and show legal reason why
that person should be detained. If no such cause or reason could be
given, the accused person must be set at liberty. The guaranty of
the right to a writ of habeas corpus under our Constitution is
considered hereafter. See page 144.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account