Thank you for your inquiry Your question is confusing. The 5th amendment is the right against being compelled to testify against yourself. In other words, a confession or admissions cannot be compelled. Our Supreme Court has held that it is coercive to question someone while in custody without giving them miranda rights. If this is done, then a confession can be excluded from evidence. The 5th amendment can be asserted at trial if a person is asked questions that may incriminate themselves, or a statement is offered at trial in violation of miranda. Immunity is the possible response to an assertion of the 5th amendment. The best way to explain is by an example. If a witness is called to testify against a defendant, and the statements the witness may make about the defendant will possibly incriminate the witness, then the witness could assert the 5th amendment and refuse to testify. However, the prosecutor can offer immunity to the testifying witness. This offer of immunity will protect the witness from being proseuted for the statements the witness may make about the defendant while being questioned at trial. In this way, a witness can be compelled to testify over their assertion of the 5th amendment right against self-incrimination. Therefore, a person is not "given immunity to plead the 5th." Instead, a person may assert their 5th amendment privilege to not testify against themselves by making admissions or incriminating statements. The prosecutor can offer immunity to the witness, in which case, there is nolonger a sustainable 5th amendment objection to questions based on the grounds that the testimiony may incriminate them. The witness cannot refuse to answer questions. The witness must answer questions or possibly be held in contempt. I hope that this was helpful.
Answered on Aug 08th, 2011 at 4:50 PM