Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

How Big Should the hole in Miranda Rights be?

21 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

A recent Slate article prompted me to think quite a bit about this... see

[url="http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/04/dzhokhar_tsarnaev_and_miranda_rights_the_public_safety_exception_and_terrorism.html"]http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/04/dzhokhar_tsarnaev_and_miranda_rights_the_public_safety_exception_and_terrorism.html[/url]

[quote]Holder started talking about a bill to broadly expand the exception to Miranda a few months later. Nothing came of that idea, but in October of 2010, Holder’s Justice Department took it upon itself to widen the exception to Miranda beyond the Supreme Court’s 1984 ruling. “Agents should ask any and all questions that are reasonably prompted by an immediate concern for the safety of the public or the arresting agents,” stated a DoJ memo to the FBI that wasn’t disclosed at the time. Again, fine and good. But the memo continues, “there may be exceptional cases in which, although all relevant public safety questions have been asked, agents nonetheless conclude that continued unwarned interrogation is necessary to collect valuable and timely intelligence not related to any immediate threat, and that the government's interest in obtaining this intelligence outweighs the disadvantages of proceeding with unwarned interrogation.”[/quote]

I'm not sure how I feel about this, honestly. I understand the need to get information that could be of immediate importance, yet at what point where there be oversight that prevents the usage of these exceptions from expanding too far? When do we decide to completely suspend the rights of the accused in order to continue to press for information?

It's hard for me to try to argue to preserve the rights of terrorists, but government widening the already large hole in Miranda rights is kind of frightening to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

No rights should be allowed to foreigner, or aliens that come into our country and harm or kill any property or people. It should be Gitmo or execution for any such person. The Bill of Rights or any rights, should not apply at all and should not even be considered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

[quote name='longtriad' timestamp='1366550129' post='2201386']
No rights should be allowed to foreigner, or aliens that come into our country and harm or kill any property or people. It should be Gitmo or execution for any such person. The Bill of Rights or any rights, should not apply at all and should not even be considered.
[/quote]

A you are saying the government or the bill of rights grants us our rights?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

In this case, I think treating this kid like a citizen would be the best overall course of action as the way we present ourselves to the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

If you are an american citizen, then you get the rights afforded to american citizens. Lets not overthink this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

This case is a little unique in that these are citizens but have ties to another country.

I personally have no issues with them getting info out of the kid prior to mirandizing him if it protects even one person. However the subsequent use of that info in his prosecution should be under heavy scrutiny. I suspect that they had enough info/evidence in this case prior to his questioning that its a moot point.

Definitely something to think about however...

In the case of a non citizen however, I'm with longtriad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

The major thing is the kid still has his rights. The gov just didn't make him aware of them. If he's half ass intelligent he will know this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Just thinking about it more, I guess the way I'm looking at it is, it he had pertinent info that would avoid even one more person being hurt, get it... And if it can't be used in his prosecution, so be it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

He forefieted some rights when it took others ability to have thiers.

There is supposedly a public safety clause with miranda that allows that to NOT be read.

Maybe that applies here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Anyone who's ever been arrested knows that the when and where the police read you their miranda rights matters about as much as how long you dick is, in court.

poo, those retards didn't read me my rights until I had been in handcuffs and sitting in the jail for like 5 hours on three different occasions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Anything that is said before the rights are read cannot be used in court.

Other than that, they can take as long as they want to read them to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I realize Miranda has to be read to every suspect, but how is it possible that any person could be here for a few months and not know what their rights are? Is the kid the only person in America not to have watched a single episode of Law and Order? If I were he, I would not say a word without a lawyer present, regardless of whether or not the miranda thing had been read.

That being said, they should have read the thing to him by now, the public safety exception should be a moot point by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites