"Why Clemens, Even if Innocent, Should Take the 5th"--Dershowitz

"Full disclosure: I'm a big Roger Clemens fan. I loved watching the Rocket pitch for Boston, and even when he was pitching for the Yankees, a part of me was rooting for him -- as long as he wasn't pitching against the Red Sox. I don't know whether or not Clemens took any banned substances. I watched him on 60 Minutes, and if I were a juror, I would have acquitted him.

• So let's assume, for purposes of this blog, that he never in his life took a banned substance. He is now been subpoenaed to testify in front of a judicial committee. Were I his lawyer, I would insist that he invoke the privilege against self-incrimination if asked about unlawful steroid use.

Why should he possibly take the 5th, if he's innocent? Is he even allowed to take the 5th if he's totally innocent? These are good questions, but as a lawyer with 45 years of experience in these matters, I would advise him that there is a very good reason for taking the 5th and that he would be entirely within his rights to do so.

• The 5th Amendment is not designed to protect only the guilty. It prohibits the government from compelling anyone to "incriminate" himself. Innocent people can incriminate themselves, and sometimes do....."

From Huffington Post article by Alan Dershowitz, "Why Roger Clemens, Even if Innocent, Should Take the 5th," 1/11/08

Tweet Stumbleupon StumbleUpon