I'm always advising against the making of waivers of rights for any
cause or reason. I think many do not see the harm in waiving rights.
Today I received an e-mail from a friend, and thought I'd just paste a
three-paragraph cut here for consideration:
The fifth amendment article does not create any rights. Article
amendments clarify existing rights.
"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 offence 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."
If you have agreed to an inquisition by waiving a grand jury proceeding
then you have already forfeited your right to de jure court.
------------end of cut-------
This is a good example of putting one step in front of another.
"Infamous crime" has been held to be one where time in jail is possible.
I still don't think I could use this until after I found a qualified
officer to do the holding of me and to do the interrogation seeking the
answer. Passing gang members will not suffice to fill that role.