Former Pennsylvania House Speaker H. William DeWeese, D- Waynesburg, acted within his legal prerogatives Tuesday when he invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in the corruption trial of former state Rep. Mike Veon of Beaver County.

DeWeese shouldn't be presumed to be guilty of anything because of his decision not to testify — a decision that was consistent with his attorney's advice.

But the place in which DeWeese was allowed to invoke the plea is worthy of notice, reflection, and suspicion about him possibly having been given special treatment due to his prominent legislative-leadership role in the state General Assembly.

While most judges would have required DeWeese to invoke his Fifth Amendment publicly, in open court, that isn't what happened on Tuesday. Instead of making known his decision in the courtroom in front of the judge, the defendants and anyone else present, DeWeese was permitted to invoke the right during a meeting in the chambers of Dauphin County Common Pleas Court Judge Richard A. Lewis, who is presiding over the trial of Veon, a former Democratic Caucus director of information technology, and two former legislative aides.

Veon was DeWeese's onetime right-hand man.

After invoking his Fifth Amendment option, DeWeese left the courthouse without comment.

Lawyers for Veon and his three co-defendants had wanted to call DeWeese as a witness. Their hope was to establish that DeWeese was culpable and knowledgeable about the $1.4 million in bonuses prosecutors say were paid from taxpayer funds to reward legislative staff who worked on Democratic election campaigns in 2004 and 2006.

DeWeese also is facing criminal charges in the investigation growing out of the same payroll bonus scandal that was the basis for the Veon charges. That probe, which has become known as Bonusgate, has also resulted in charges against about two dozen other state officials and staffers, including both Demo-crats and Republicans.

But people shouldn't draw any conclusions about how actions in the Veon case might apply to DeWeese's own, separate legal troubles. Like anyone else facing criminal charges, DeWeese is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty.

DeWeese's innocence or guilt will be decided in a courtroom sometime in the future. His high-profile state service presumably won't have any influence on how the trial is conducted or how innocence or guilt is determined.

But it's right to question what led the trial judge in the Veon case to grant DeWeese a special Fifth Amendment accommodation when such special treatment generally is not extended to others scheduled to testify at trials.

The place where DeWeese should have invoked his right not to testify was in the courtroom, not in the judge's chambers. Lewis should have acknowledged that and ruled accordingly.