Can Forumosa disclose your identity to the authorities?

[Charlie_Jack]

As far as I know, while, in general, people in the US can be compelled to give testimony, the exception in the US is that people cannot be compelled to testify in such a way as to incriminate themselves unless they’re granted immunity from prosecution that relies directly on the testimony:

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 offence 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.

–Amendment V, US Constitution

(The boldface was added by me.)

This protection against self-incrimination has been held by the US Supreme Court to apply in State proceedings as well as Federal ones, through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; for example:

Comment to the jury by a prosecutor in a state criminal trial upon a defendant’s failure to testify as to the matters which he can reasonably be expected to deny or explain because of facts within his knowledge or by the court that the defendant’s silence under those circumstances evidences guilt violates the Self-Incrimination Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the Federal Constitution, as made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth, Malloy v. Hogan, 378 U. S. 1. 380 U. S. 610-615.

– Griffin v. California (US Supreme Court, 1965)

(The boldface was added by me.)

Edited to add:

Article 181 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of China seems to contain a similar restriction:

A witness may refuse to testify if his testimony may subject himself or the person having the relationship to him specified in section I of the preceding article to criminal prosecution or punishment.

Article 180, referred to in Article 181, seems to contain other limitations on compulsory testimony.

[anon24369109]

@Taiwan_Luthiers

If I stop posting misinformation, real or perceived, there will always be another reason.

Try us. It wouldn’t be a bad thing to not have you come into every post.
Your SOP is to make stuff up and cry about being cyber bullied when get called out.

Your response each time is well “I don’t know” when asked to back your claims.

I think all your posts should be posted in this thread.

Why do People Demand 100% Accuracy on Facts/Advice?

This is about one country. Brunei. As you clearly have no clue it uses the Singapore dollar and even did so when I lived there in 1986 - 1988 maybe just stop commenting on things you know nothing about please. Fine I don’t know exactly about brunai, but this advise applies to most countries other than the US, Canada, or the EU, Australia or new Zealand. Why do people demand 100 percent accuracy on facts, like who cares if the suicide hotline phones on the golden gate bridge is spaced 20, 5…

[Explant]

@Taiwan_Luthiers

You cannot require someone to testify against anyone, or even themselves. They are free to testify if they want to, though if their church (say the Catholic church) will throw them out of the church for doing so, that is their freedom. That’s 5th amendment protection.

To require someone to testify is authoritarian.

Perhaps these are different things we are talking about.

If we remove the cult. And say say “generally, anyone”. If person. You or me. Person A: has an admission that person B is going to commit rape/murder/serious fucked up crime against humanity, are they off the hook? Naturally, things get Grey easily. Countries have different legal takes on how to deal with people that did nothing that could have prevented such crimes. Fair or not, everyone should be held to the same standard of law. With very few exceptions. Cults, I feel, REALLY shouldn’t be exempt anymore. I understand the brainwash is still quite prevalent, but that doesn’t justify them anymore. We are more educated, more intelligent and have far more freedom of information. The latter being bkey. Religions have increasingly less purpose for societies that are stable and aware.

My point is, as a minimum, follow those laws. Cults shouldnt get immunity for fairly obvious reasons (their bias, control, lies and taxation outside standard societal legal requirements). They are cherry picking. Get all the benefits without any costs. This is unfair, to put it mildly. Their gravy train has an expiry date now, at least in many societies. Probably why so many are embracing science and changing their their stories to match science just enough to still attract conscripts.

[the_bear]

Ah the pope himself gave George Pell a job in the Vatican to shield him from police investigation in Australia. There are no sweeping generalizations watch the movie Spotlight and educate yourself. The Catholic Church has systematically protected child molesting priests for centuries.

[anon24369109]

George Pell was charged and convicted. He did not have diplomatic immunity. On appeal his conviction was overturned.

TL tossed out a claim that priests have diplomatic immunity which the don’t. Even Bishops and Cardinals don’t. Those posted to Vatican can have it.

[crusher]

@the_bear

Ah the pope himself gave George Pell a job in the Vatican to shield him from police investigation in Australia. There are no sweeping generalizations watch the movie Spotlight and educate yourself. The Catholic Church has systematically protected child molesting priests for centuries.

Im not Catholic.

[the_bear]

No I know. But Pell was shipped to Rome to make it as difficult as possible for the police investigation to proceed. Although to be fair once the case was established I think he was persuaded to return.

[crusher]

@anon24369109

George Pell was charged and convicted. He did not have diplomatic immunity. On appeal his conviction was overturned.

TL tossed out a claim that priests have diplomatic immunity which the don’t. Even Bishops and Cardinals don’t. Those posted to Vatican can have it.

It’s kind of complex. It’s called “The Holy See Diplomacy”

Vatican Diplomacy - Diplomat Magazine

[qbert]

There was a poster here about 10 or 15 years ago who was asking for advice about extradition treaties. He didn’t explicitly admit it but strongly hinted that he committed date rape while drunk. The thread got sent to the flame forum so I don’t know what eventually happened. He said he was headed to the airport back to Canada.