Have Legal Questions? Ask a Lawyer Now.
Yes, I understand that but ultimately he needs representation or needs to know what to cite himself when he goes before the parole review board.
Excuse me, but are you asking for more information?
Thank you for your response and understanding. I am afraid that he is going to have to argue his Due Process rights under the 5th Amendment which protect him from self incrimination while his case is actively on appeal for the very issues that he is being asked to forcibly sign admitting to. Due Process under the 5th Amendment protects him from self incrimination while at the same time protesting his innocence and his right to due process in the appeals process. In front of the parole board he would argue that United States Constitution and article I, section 10, of the Illinois Constitution (U.S. Const., amend. V; Ill. Const.1970, art. I, § 10), and (b) his due process rights under the fifth amendment to the United States Constitution and article I, section 2, of the Illinois Constitution (U.S. Const., amend. V; Ill. Const.1970, art. I, § 2). The court In People v. Martin, 226 Ill.App.3d 753, 168 Ill.Dec. 415, 589 N.E.2d 815 (1992), the court addressed whether the defendant's fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination was violated when the State called him to testify at his probation revocation hearing. Relying on Minnesota v. Murphy, 465 U.S. 420, 104 S.Ct. 1136, 79 L.Ed.2d 409 (1984), Allen v. Illinois, 478 U.S. 364, 106 S.Ct. 2988, 92 L.Ed.2d 296 (1986), People v. Davis, 216 Ill.App.3d 884, 159 Ill.Dec. 841, 576 N.E.2d 510 (1991), and Professor LaFave (3 W. LaFave & J. Israel, Criminal Procedure § 25.4, at 164 (1984)). The court held that a defendant's fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination was not violated by the State's calling him to testify at his probation revocation hearing "to elicit testimony which would show that the defendant had violated conditions of his probation but which would not incriminate him in any other proceedings." Martin, 226 Ill. App.3d at 759, 168 Ill.Dec. 415, 589 N.E.2d at 818. However in your son's case, he would be compelled to admit he did not sign the admission of guilt, but it would be a violation of his due process right to force him to admit guilt while his appeal is pending.
Thank you so much for using JustAnswer.com. I truly aim to please you as a customer, but please keep in mind that I do not know what you already know or don't know, or with what you need help, unless you tell me. If I did not answer the question you thought you were asking, please respond with the specific question you wanted answered. PLEASE use REPLY to EXPERT if you would like more information or if you feel something was not included in your answer.
Kindly remember the ONLY WAY experts receive any credit at all for spending time with customers is if you click on OK, GOOD or EXCELLENT SERVICE even though you have made a deposit or are a subscription customer. YOU MUST COMPLETE THE RATING FOR THE EXPERT TO RECEIVE ANY CREDIT, if not the site keeps your money on deposit.
Also remember, sometimes the law does not support what we want it to support, but that is not the fault of the person answering the question, so please be courteous.
PLEASE NOTE WELL WE ARE DEALING WITH LAWS OF 50 STATES PLUS FEDERAL LAWS, AS WELL AS DEALING WITH OTHER CUSTOMERS, SO PLEASE BE PATIENT AND BE ASSURED YOU ARE NOT BEING IGNORED.
There can also be a delay of an hour or more in between my answers because I may be taking a break.
You can always request me through my profile at http://www.justanswer.com/law/expert-paulmjd/ or beginning your question with “For PaulMJD…”
My question is why should he plead the fifth when defending why he refused to sign the sex offender class papers where he would have had to admit guilt to the crime, which from the beginning he stated he did not do. It was his word against the 'victim's', who was a 21 year old mentally challenged cousin. She stated that though he was drunk, he wanted to have intercourse with her but was unable to 'do it' so he inserted his finger inside her 'for five minutes'. She stated he held her down on the couch, though she testified that just minutes earlier, he was so drunk he was unable to walk straight. The Judge, who stated from the bench that she had been sexually molested as a teenager (and refused to recuse herself), decided that a girl with the mentality of a thirteen year old (according to her) would not make up such a story.
Now, he served the time and was released to parole, but parole knew beforehand that he had the post conviction petition before the appealant court, knowing he couldn't sign any papers admitting guilt or the P.C.P. would be nullified. As it is, the question remains, why does parole or any other office have the right to try to force someone to admit guilt when they refuse to do so. They are telling him now that unless he admits his guilt, they will keep him in prison until he does. How is this legal?
Thank you for that information, Paul. The question remains, was it legal for parole to violate his parole because he refused to sign the papers, though they knew in advance of being paroled that he had the P,C.P. in the Appealant Court? Since they knew his due process of law hadn't been exhausted, why did they try to force him to sign the papers then violate him for not doing so...knowing he couldn't or it would nullify the PCP?
If he must serve more time, can he legally be held only be held until he finishes the other 15% or can they keep him there for parole term, which is three years to life?
Regardless of what happens at the hearing, If he is kept for the three years, or even the 15%, unless the PCP is finished and answered, will be released under the same mandates? (Of having to take the sex offender classes and be forced to admit to his guilt or go back to prison again...and again...and again?)
Even if the PCP is denied, why is it that parole has the right to try to force him to admit to guilt?
These are great answers, but I wonder still why parole can force him to admit guilt or serve life in prison. Just because a Judge determined he was guilty- does that make him guilty? Even if the appeals fall through, does that make him guilty? What is the law that says parole can keep him in prison until he signs papers admitting to guilt? If the classes are not further punishment, why are they terms of his release? What does it mean that the classes are administrative in nature?
Paul, you really helped me understand what is happening with my son-in-law during this horrible time, but neither of us understand how anyone, sex offender or not, can be forced to admit to guilt when they didn't do the crime. After all, we don't live in Soviet Russia. Don't accused sex offenders still have constitutional rights? How can they keep someone in prison for life (!!!) when his crime is supposedly that while drunk and stoned on crack, he put his finger in a girl, who was also drunk and stoned on crack, for five minutes? Why is it that all accused sex offenders are treated like a one size fits all crime, unlike murder that has several degrees? I'm asking these questions to try to help Aaron as best I can.
I know what you're saying but HOW is this legal in America? How is he supposed to go through a sex offender class and pretend that he's sorry for something he didn't do? It's crazy!
If someone accused of murder runs out of appeals, why isn't he forced to admit guilt?
Why is this legal only for people accused of a sex offense?
This is so wrong. In the last six months I've talked to countless people who have been or have had a child, brother or friend accused of sexual assault and their lives have been horrendous.
Can you give me any ideas of what I need to do or who I need to talk to start an inquiry about this?
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).