A more thorough explanation:

The assenting-silence doctrine is a principle that states that if an accusation is made under circumstances where silence can be considered agreement, then the accusation will be taken as true even if the accused remains silent. However, this doctrine is generally not considered valid as a measure of a criminal defendant's guilt.

For example, if someone accuses another person of stealing and the accused remains silent, the accuser may argue that the silence is an admission of guilt. However, this argument is not valid as there could be many reasons why the accused remained silent, such as not wanting to incriminate themselves or not understanding the accusation.

Another example could be in a contract negotiation where one party presents terms and the other party remains silent. The presenting party may argue that the silence is an agreement to the terms, but this argument is also not valid as the other party may not have understood the terms or may have been considering other options.

Overall, the assenting-silence doctrine is not a reliable measure of guilt or agreement as there are many reasons why someone may remain silent in response to an accusation or proposal.