tartoranMar 15

Treasure hunter freed from jail after refusing to turn over shipwreck gold

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cg4g7kn99q3o

Treasure hunter freed from jail after refusing to turn over shipwreck gold

Tommy Thompson spent more than a decade in prison after refusing to disclose the whereabouts of 500 missing gold coins.

Show threadRefreeze5224
The real story here is that civil contempt can net you an indefinite prison sentence without a conviction, and if you're lucky a judge will decide to let you out. Over something you may or may not even know.
Mar 15 at 3:42amWeb
Show threadAnalemma_Mar 15
How else could it possibly work? The justice system depends on judges being able to compel action. Within the guardrails established by the system (e.g. no self-incriminating testimony, if you’re in the US), I don’t have a problem with refusal to e.g. turn over evidence just resulting in detention until you comply. It’s not a prison sentence, since you can get out any time you want.
Show threadbravoetchMar 15
You ask how else could it possibly work. How about charge him with a crime first, then detain him if he's convicted. The idea that you can imprison someone forever without a charge is insane.
Show threadtptacekMar 15
You can't resolve criminal liability without compliance to judicial authority. It's not even a meaningful demand. If you don't trust the judiciary you can't trust any other component of the system!
Show threadBrian_K_WhiteMar 15

Then you can charge him with the crime of contempt, and allow that charge to be proven or disproven through actual due process.

There is no such thing as a valid reason to skip the part where you have to prove guilt. Even for a judge. Frankly especially for a judge. Everyone else has the excuse that they aren't lawyers. What's a judges excuse?

Show threadtptacekMar 15
You can't prove or disprove anything with someone who refuses to comply with the courts. This is due process.
Show threadjjk166Mar 15
A jury could have decided whether his refusal to disclose made him guilty of a crime deserving of that punishment. Authority and power are two different things. Lots of people have authority without the power to unilaterally throw people in prison indefinitely.
Show threadtptacekMar 15
That's not how court works. It's not a democratic vote of a group of people just making up their own mind. The judge intricately controls what the jury does and does not hear, and how they are instructed, based on the rules of evidence and of criminal or civil procedure. No, you can't just "let the jury decide" if a party to a case simply decides to ignore the judge.
Show threadjjk166Mar 15
No, that is how it works. If you are charged with criminal contempt, you have the right to a jury trial, and the jury determines whether guilt has been proven to the appropriate standard.
Show threadtptacekMar 15
He plead guilty to criminal contempt. That's not the issue.
Show threadcortesoftMar 15

Doesn't this give the government the unchecked ability to detain whoever they want indefinitely, then?

They could just demand someone turn over evidence that doesn't exist, or that they know the person doesn't know about?

Show threadMBCookMar 15
Isn’t that exactly what this article is about? A guy that was released from jail on contempt because it can’t be used indefinitely?
Show threadbobsmoothMar 15
After a decade in prison without being charged.
Show threadtptacekMar 15
He was charged, with contempt.
Show threadtptacekMar 15
Seems sort of like he was held for as long as he'd have been held if he'd been judged guilty of stealing everything he was accused of stealing, and if he wanted to default himself into prison for that stretch without a trial, the judge was content to oblige him.