Soldier linked to sex assaults can blame identical twin, judge rules

[Barrister]

Why would the brother need to cop to it for the defense to work?

Because as soon as the defence says that want the jury to consider whether or not the brother did it, the prosecution would call the brother in rebuttal.

Well couldn't he here just invoke his 5th amendment rights if put on the stand?

Well not in Canada he couldn't.*

But in the US, yes he could.  And then immediately brand himself to the entire world as a rapist.






*I actually called a "separately charged co-conspirator" as a witness last Friday.  It was fun.

[Tonitrus]

This reminds me of an episode of "The Commish", where he was foiled by twin brothers both confessing to murder, and saying the other one didn't do it.

[dps]

The "evil twin defence" can actually work quite well, assuming you do in fact have an identical twin.  I remember we had quite a bit of trouble with a pair of twin young offenders at one point.

In this case though I am going to assume that the twin is not interested in being labelled as a sex offender in court, and would co-operate with establishing his alibis for all of the offences in question.

What I don't understand is why there had to be a ruling by the judge that he could use this as a defense.

[garbon]

The "evil twin defence" can actually work quite well, assuming you do in fact have an identical twin.  I remember we had quite a bit of trouble with a pair of twin young offenders at one point.

In this case though I am going to assume that the twin is not interested in being labelled as a sex offender in court, and would co-operate with establishing his alibis for all of the offences in question.

What I don't understand is why there had to be a ruling by the judge that he could use this as a defense.

Doesn't that sometimes happen when a defense seems wacky? Here's another example I could find.

http://hawaiinewsdaily.com/2013/08/judge-cannabis-ministers-religion-protected-under-rfra/

[Ideologue]

Why would the brother need to cop to it for the defense to work?

Because as soon as the defence says that want the jury to consider whether or not the brother did it, the prosecution would call the brother in rebuttal.

Well couldn't he here just invoke his 5th amendment rights if put on the stand?

Lol.

[garbon]

Enlighten me, counselor.

[Ideologue]

Basically just what Beeb said.

But actually--while I would have to look it up--I would suspect fraudulently claiming the Fifth Amendment in order to subvert a jury may fall under into the ambit of perjury.

[garbon]

Basically just what Beeb said.

Sure but whether or not that is something a person would want to do depends on the relationship between the brothers, no? Besides a cynical person could say think that he just did so to help protect and alleged rapist.

But actually--while I would have to look it up--I would suspect fraudulently claiming the Fifth Amendment in order to subvert a jury may fall under into the ambit of perjury.

Presumably they would have to prove that.

[Ideologue]

Basically just what Beeb said.

Sure but whether or not that is something a person would want to do depends on the relationship between the brothers, no? Besides a cynical person could say think that he just did so to help protect and alleged rapist.

Which is better..?

But actually--while I would have to look it up--I would suspect fraudulently claiming the Fifth Amendment in order to subvert a jury may fall under into the ambit of perjury.

Presumably they would have to prove that.

Insofar as it is a crime, yes.

Actually, it's kind of an interesting scenario, and it marks literally the first time I've been interested in a legal question in well over a year.  I think we should ask Mihali, he'd know.

[Ideologue]

And by "know" I mean "Mihali still has a Westlaw account."

[garbon]

Basically just what Beeb said.

Sure but whether or not that is something a person would want to do depends on the relationship between the brothers, no? Besides a cynical person could say think that he just did so to help protect and alleged rapist.

Which is better..?

Protecting a rapist out of misguided sense of family loyalty at least seems a little understandable as compared to be a child rapist.