Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings

Source:
"Ashcroft Aide Threatens to Take the Fifth"

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/26745.html

Connection to the Constitution:
Amendment 5: "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Analysis to the Connection:

       The founders made sure that citizens had the right to be involved or cooperating in a state or infamous crimes.  No person can can be subjected to cooperate in a same offense they already cooperated in.  The founders wrote that no one would be involved in a criminal case to be a witness against himself.  The person must be given some type of compensation for being a public use. 
       The founders created a certain process where any citizen can plead the fifth in a public matter or case.  The citizen cooperating shall recieve certain compensation for participation.

John Ashcroft Pleads the Fifth to from Testifying

       In the article "Ashcroft Aide Threaens to Take the Fifth",  Attorney Ashcroft is pleading the "Fifth to avoid from testifying in a case against a GOP lobbyist."  Ayres said that he is pleading the fifth because he is not going to give up information that will end up incriminating him.  He is not going to speculate on the problem because he is saying that he has no right to cooperate in a case he had no connections with.
       I agree with him because he has a choice and in this case he is being invovled it is a state matter and the fourth amendment says citizens have the right to keep silence if it is a trial against the state.  If he says he has no connection with the case then there is no way you can prove it wrong unless you have a different eye witness that can testify that he actually was involved.