SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
An Uber engineer accused of data theft against Google must privately explain the circumstances behind invoking his Fifth Amendment right to the judge in the case:
During a Wednesday court hearing, a federal judge said that if an Uber engineer accused of a massive data theft from his former employer is going to invoke his Fifth Amendment right to protect against self-incrimination and not hand over materials demanded as part of a recent subpoena and upcoming deposition, then he must at least explain himself privately to the judge.
"What I've told you is that you can submit the privilege log to me, in camera, without giving it to anyone else and I can evaluate it, which aspects, if any would be incriminating," US District Judge William Alsup said, addressing a lawyer representing the engineer, Anthony Levandowski, during the hearing. "I'm not ruling against the ultimate assertion of the privilege, but you've got to do more than just say in court, Fifth Amendment—you have to do a privilege log and go through the process."
The case pits Waymo against Uber, which in turn is in a tense situation with one of its own employees, Levandowski, the head of its self-driving division. Levandowski is now set to be deposed by Waymo lawyers this Friday at their San Francisco offices. He must also respond to a subpoena by handing over materials that he is accused of stealing— thousands of secret documents from his time with Waymo parent company, Google. On Wednesday, Judge Alsup quashed four of the six distinct items requested in the subpoena, but allowed first the most substantive, the allegedly "misappropriated materials," to stand. (The third item, "All communications between You and Uber between January 2015 and August 2016," will also remain.)
(Score: 2) by jasassin on Sunday April 16 2017, @11:52PM (1 child)
If he says no, can he be held in contempt of court? It's the 5th... Man this a buncha fuckin bullshit!
jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0xE6462C68A9A3DB5A
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 17 2017, @07:45PM
Not at all. the 5th protects ONLY YOU from CRIMINAL prosecution BY THE GOVERNMENT. It's like how the 1st Amendment only protects speech from government hands, it doesn't restrict businesses from censoring you. You can't just claim the 5th for non-relevant stuff. What's going on here is that the judge will privately listen to the testimony, and decide if the witness is justified. If he's pleading the 5th to avoid incriminating Uber, or anybody else, then it's not valid, and he can be compelled - under threat of contempt - to testify. The judge is SUPPOSED to be a totally neutral party, so it should be safe, but we've seen the idiocy of the politicization of the judicial branch with the morons who keep voting for biased judges thinking it won't come back to bite them, so YMMV.
This really isn't a big deal, and it would really be nice for more judges to do this, rather than just listen to scumbag executives claiming the 5th for hundreds of questions. Or just lying, f there isn't hard evidence already present. : ) Of course, this guy isn't a CEO, so the Executive Privilege* doesn't apply. : |
*: Golden Rule