Assert Your Rights

(PLEASE NOTE: These statements fit, and can be printed, on standard size 3 1/2" x 2" Business Card stock. They can be re-typed, copied/pasted, or saved as a .jpg file, and then printed on separate Business Cards, or together on the front and backside of the same card. Avery #8871, White, Two-Side Printable, "Clean Edge Business Cards," or "Royal Brites" Business Cards (sold at Sam's Club) make nice business cards, using personal computer printing software.)

Just Copy and Paste the below Text Statement onto a Business Card template, and then resize to fit.

Statement - If Stopped or Questioned by Police or any Government Official

“Officer, I Assert My Fifth Amendment Rights As Stated On This Card”

Pursuant to the law, as established by the United States Supreme Court, my lawyer has advised me not to talk to anyone and not to answer questions about any pending criminal case or any other civil, administrative, judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory matter. Following his advice, I do not wish to talk to anyone about any criminal, civil, administrative, judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory matter, without my lawyer present. I waive no legal rights, nor give any consents, nor submit to any tests or other procedures, without my lawyer present. I ask that no one question or talk to me, without my lawyer here to advise me.

I do not wish to answer any questions. I want to see my lawyer.
Please call my lawyer immediately.

See: Miranda v. Arizona, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), Maness v. Myers, 419 U.S. 449 (1975), Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, (1951), Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77 (1973), Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441 (1972).

Just Copy and Paste the below Text information onto a Business Card template, and then resize to fit.

Know Your Fifth Amendment Rights

Precedent U.S. Supreme Court Case: Maness v. Myers, 95 S. Ct. 584, 419 U.S. 449 (1975).

"...where the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination is involved...This Court has always broadly construed its protection to assure that an individual is not compelled to produce evidence which later may be used against him as an accused in a criminal action...The protection does not merely encompass evidence which may lead to criminal conviction, but includes information which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence that could lead to prosecution, as well as evidence which an individual reasonably believes could be used against him in a criminal prosecution. Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486, 71 S. Ct. 814, 818, 95 L.Ed. 1118 (1951)."

"In Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441, 92 S.Ct. 1653, 32 LEd. 212 (1972), we recently reaffirmed the principle that the privilege against self-incrimination can be asserted in any proceeding, civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory. Id., at 444, 92 S.Ct., at 1656; Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77, 94 S. Ct. 316, 322, 38 L.Ed.2d 274 (1973)..."

www.assertrights.com

"The Fifth Amendment provides that no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself. The Amendment not only protects the individual against being involuntarily called as a witness against himself in a criminal prosecution but also privileges him not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings." McCarthy v. Arndstein, 266 U.S 34, 40, 45 S. Ct. 16, 17, 69 L.Ed. 158 (1924), squarely held that "the privilege is not ordinarily dependent upon the nature of the proceeding in which the testimony is sought or is to be used. It applies alike to civil and criminal proceedings, wherever the answer might tend to subject to criminal responsibility him who gives it. The privilege protects a mere witness as fully as it does one who is a party defendant."

"...where the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination is involved...This Court has always broadly construed its protection to assure that an individual is not compelled to produce evidence which later may be used against him as an accused in a criminal action...The protection does not merely encompass evidence which may lead to criminal conviction, but includes information which would furnish a link in the chain of evidence that could lead to prosecution, as well as evidence which an individual reasonably believes could be used against him in a criminal prosecution. Hoffman v. United States, 341 U.S. 479, 486, 71 S. Ct. 814, 818, 95 L.Ed. 1118 (1951)."

"In Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441, 92 S.Ct. 1653, 32 LEd. 212 (1972), we recently reaffirmed the principle that the privilege against self-incrimination can be asserted in any proceeding, civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory. Id., at 444, 92 S.Ct., at 1656; Lefkowitz v. Turley, 414 U.S. 70, 77, 94 S. Ct. 316, 322, 38 L.Ed.2d 274 (1973)..."

"We have recently noted that the privilege against self-incrimination--the essential mainstay of our adversary system--is founded on a complex of values...To maintain a fair state-individual balance, to require the government to shoulder the entire load...to respect the inviolability of the human personality, our accusatory system of criminal justice demands that the government seeking to punish an individual produce the evidence against him by its own independent labors, rather than by the cruel, simple expedient of compelling it from his own mouth...In sum, the privilege is fulfilled only when the person is guaranteed the right to remain silent unless he chooses to speak in the unfettered exercise of his own will."

"...there can be no doubt that the Fifth Amendment privilege is available outside of criminal court proceedings and serves to protect persons in all settings in which their freedom of action is curtailed in any significant way from being compelled to incriminate themselves."

PLEASE NOTE: The above Supreme Court cases have not been overturned by the Court and are still precedent Supreme Court decisions. The cases state the supreme law of the United States of America. They apply to every meeting and conversation with ANY and ALL Federal, State, and Local government officials, including, but not limited to, Licensing Board Officials, School Teachers/Officials, Administrative Tribunals/Judges/Officials, Agency Inspectors, Investigators, Auditors and, of course, Law Enforcement Officers and Agents.

Moreover, your protective 5th Amendment Constitutional Rights apply at ALL times, Even If You Are Only A Witness Or Not Represented By A Lawyer - Unless you choose NOT to remain silent - and choose to speak in the unfettered exercise of Your Own Free Will (meaning that your decision is completely voluntary, and that you have NOT been bullied, coerced, intimidated, or unlawfully scared or tricked into talking).

Also, a decision to waive (meaning to ignore, give up and abandon) your 5th Amendment Constitutional Rights must be made knowingly and intelligently (meaning you clearly understand your 5th Amendment Rights regarding self incrimination, which includes understanding that Anything You Say - Can, And Most Likely Will Be - Used Against You).

Many INNOCENT individuals have been imprisoned, or otherwise harmed, merely because they chose to answer questions asked by some Law Enforcement Officer or government official, agent, representative, tribunal, or employee. It Is Very Important To Understand That The 5th Amendment Protects The Innocent More Than The Guilty.

A Business Card, with the above statements printed on it, should be carried at all times in the wallet of everyone living in the U.S.A.

The above information should be read until "You Get It" -
Meaning you acquire a Very, Very, Very Clear Understanding.
If that takes reading it 100 times - then read it 100 times!

*****************************************************************

This Web Site is Dedicated to Life, Liberty, Freedom, and the Pursuit of Happiness

Help To Make Americans Aware Of The True Extent Of Their 5th Amendment Rights

Watch and Listen to a Law Professor and Veteran Police Officer, as they Warn You Never to Talk.

Contrary To ANY & ALL Other Information Given or Told to You By ANYONE (No Exceptions!)

The Court: "In sum, a suspect who has received and understood the Miranda warnings, and has not invoked his Miranda rights, waives the right to remain silent by making an uncoerced statement to the police. Thompkins did not invoke his right to remain silent and stop the questioning. Understanding his rights in full, he waived his right to remain silent by making a voluntary statement to the police. The police, moreover, were not required to obtain a waiver of Thompkins’s right to remain silent before interrogating him."

The Supreme Court Decision Highlights The Reason Why Everyone Should Carry This Card!