There are notable instances in which confessions were made and signed by innocent parties, who were discouraged because the facts seemed to be all against them, who felt that they were certain to be convicted, and that their punishment would be lighter if they would make a confession. Under this impression they made and signed a confession. It was afterward found that the confession was false and that they were innocent of the crime. This constitutional guaranty protects against any injustice of this kind. These careful efforts of the makers of the Constitution to guard the liberties of the most humble persons must impress us with the earnestness of their efforts to make this a free country, where no one shall be deprived of his life or liberty except where proven guilty, after a most carefully guarded trial. Isn’t it fine to live in a country where the people have a Constitution written in such simple language that even the little children can read it? I want every one, even the smallest child, to understand that every line of the Constitution was written to guard and protect each one of us, young and old, against injustice and wrong. These safeguards cannot be taken away except by the people themselves. The President cannot change the Constitution. Congress cannot change it. Judges cannot change it. No one but the men and women of America can alter it in the least. ELEMENTARY QUESTIONS 1. Show how being put on trial again and again for the same offense would be an injustice. 2. Why is it right to have the verdict of “not guilty” final? 3. What would be the result if it were not final? 4. Why is this of _particular_ advantage to the poor man? 5. Why should no man be compelled to be a witness against himself? 6. Why do they allow a man to be a witness if he so desires? 7. What is the importance of the guaranty protecting the defendant from being examined as a witness? 8. When a person is indicted for an offense, what is the duty of the government with reference to proof of guilt? 9. How is guilt proven in court? 10. When may a confession made outside of court be introduced as evidence? 11. Why would anyone accused of a crime confess guilt, when in fact he might not be guilty at all? 12. Can the President or Congress or a judge change any of the provisions of the Constitution? ADVANCED QUESTIONS A. Discuss the democracy of the provision that the verdict of “not guilty” is final while that of “guilty” may not of necessity be final? B. Why are confessions wrung from frightened or tortured men likely to be untrustworthy? C. Why should the “Third Degree” methods be prohibited? D. Write a paper on the following: The Third Degree Early Cases of Torturing Accused Persons The Burdens, Disadvantages, and Injustice of Permitting a Retrial After A Verdict of “Not Guilty” Methods Sometimes Used to Secure a Confession of Guilt XIII. LIFE, LIBERTY, AND PROPERTY