True or false?

Peter and Paul are business associates. The police enter the business with a search warrant because Peter is under investigation for a crime. When the police ask Paul to answer some questions, he agrees, but one of the questions, if answered, might make him culpable too. Paul must answer the question because he is not under investigation and therefore does not currently have the right against self-incrimination.

This assertion is false

Explanation:

The freedom of self-incrimination protects the everybody irrespective of whether he's innocent or guilty by limiting the power of the government.

This means that nobody (including Paul) can be compelled to be a witness against himself or forced to say anything against his wish

The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution establishes the privilege against self- incrimination. This prevents the government from forcing a person to testify against himself

Hence, Paul has the right against self-incrimination

1. should those convicted of violating laws be labeled?

-yes, because they are violating other people's human rights, so why should they get their's and other's don't?

2. do you feel that this labeling would be an infringement on a person's rights?

-yes it does technically but they lose the right to be human when they rap.e people of everything they have.

answer:

telsla

explanation:

because it is the future of the worlds technolgy