I watched a crime drama TV show recently, in which the detective didn't get to ask questions of the psychoanalyst. In this show the detective was probably trying to get around the psychoanalyst's "blocking" and "defensiveness" by going along with his "professional" refusal to co-operate, but it nearly made the show ridiculous. And at least one viewer wondered how true-to-life the scenario was. I hope it was very fantastic, but perhaps it wasn't.
As far as I understand it, there are no legal exceptions to the subpoena power--the legal power to force someone to appear in court. No one gets to "just say no". When on the witness stand, we have the Fifth Amendment guarantee that no one may be forced to testify against him or herself (which at one time would have been arranged with torture, or threats to family members). Today this means that as long as a witness makes it clear that his or her refusal to co-operate (to answer a question on the witness stand) is based on a refusal to incriminate him or herself, that he or she will not be charged with contempt of court.
Suggestion--everyone else who refuses to testify is in contempt of court, just as the law says--be it a priest, a psychoanalyst, a reporter, or anyone else.
No comments:
Post a Comment