Instead of taking the 5th can I object

[rommel92]

Can I object to the direct questions that the prosecution will ask. I ask this because I do object to them. I object to being involved in a lawsuit with absolutely no proof. If they ask me "did you use a programmer to program a dtv access card" can I object to answering based on the fact I should not be there. Could I take pictures of people buying guns, then when someone gets shot, bring them all to court. I could ask them all "did you shoot the gun" There seems to be an inherent problem in this procedure. Please tell me that my constitution protects me better than this.

[directvp4]

They will do discovery first and ask you that question. At that time you can object to the question and not answer. Then Uncle Dave will have to ask the judge to order you to answer the question, and at that hearing you can object to the question before the judge. You are better off filing a countersuit before discovery. I would file a "Motion to Dismiss" to their original suit on the grounds that it is "Malicious Prosecution" and then file a countersuit for "Harassment". This is said on the basis that they do not have the necessary proof and you know they are on a fishing expedition to find the proof.(i.e. a shipping record and no receipt of sale). OBJECT TO ANY QUESTION IN A DEPOSITION that is obviously a fishing expedition in order for them to get the proof for the lawsuit.

You are better off taking the offensive and ask them in written interrogatories (discovery)to provide the proof that you illegally stole their signal, these interrogatories are regarded as a good and inexpensive means of establishing important facts held by the adversary(Dave). Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 33.