The accused's attitudes after commission of offenses reflect his danger and culpability which could not be neglected at sentencing according to Item 10 of Article 57 of the Criminal Law and other laws. Since the current practice considers the accused's attitudes, including confession, reconciliation, and plea to be factors influencing sentencing, whether the right to silence conflicts with the practice of Item 10 of Article 57 of the Criminal Law becomes a question attracting attentions of the parties. The Supreme Court cases of 95 Tai Sun 701, 97 Tai Sun 6725 and 98 Tai Sun 5827 focuses on the issue mentioned above. As a result, whether exercising the right to silence and false statements at trial could be considered bad attitudes after commission of offenses , and hence becomes a "Item 10 of Article 57 of the Criminal Law" factor against the accused deserves serious concerns. After analyzing theses cases, this paper concludes with the following three claims: 1. confession is a favor factor for the accused; 2. remaining silence should be a neutral factor; 3. false statement might be a factor against the accused.