Chamberlain v. Willson & Prescott
Supreme Court of Vermont
Trespass for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close and tearing down and demolishing his dwelling house. Plea not guilty. Issue to the country.
Read the full summary
Trespass for breaking and entering the plaintiff’s close and tearing down and demolishing his dwelling house. Plea not guilty. Issue to the country. On the trial in the county court, the plaintiff called as a witness Oscar B. Blake, and put to 'him the following question, “ What do you know of the defendant’s tearing down of the plaintiff’s house ?” to which the witness answered, that he could not testily without exposing himself to a prosecution for crime, and disclosing his own guilt, and so criminating himself, and claimed to be excused from testifying. Whereupon the court decided that the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Redfield, J.
— It is well settled, that a witness is not bound to answer any question, the answer to which might tend to criminate him, i. e. expose him to a prosecution for crime, or penalty.
It is doubtless true, that this is not the most effectual mode *493of shielding the witness ; for the -mere fact of claiming the privilege tends very much to show him guilty of the of-fence. A" rule that the testimony should-be given in all cas-' es, but should never after be used for the purpose of procuring a conviction of crime, would be more conducive to the…
2Cited by17 opinions
- Ex parte SeniorSupreme Court of Florida · 1896
- Scribner v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1913
- International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America v. HatasSupreme Court of Alabama · 1971
- State v. ThadenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- In Re Adjudication of Contempt of MyersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.