Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
this seems to be a grey area created by the patriot act. interrogation by a federal official for 48 hours then the person in custody must then be marandized.
This 48 hours is the grey area. Can they infact interrogate him and not provide him a lawyer if he requests one? do the contitue the interroagtion? what is the purpose of not informing him of his 5th amendment rights?
this maybe case law to challenge that provision in the patriot act.
My sense is that they can hold him for interrogation, but he still retains his civil rights: he can steadfastly refuse to answer questions and demand an attorney when the period ends.
Now, in practice, his ability to resist interrogation depends partly on his fortitude and partly on the method of interrogation. But if I were the federal prosecutor, I wouldn't risk such a high-profile case by allowing the use of "extreme methods" - that could backfire hugely.
Nope, you are incorrect. Just because they don't mirandize him, doesn't mean he doesn't have the right. They are just not informing him of said right
He can say "I'm not talking, get my lawyer". There is nothing they can do.
Nope, you are incorrect. If you are in the custody of armed men who reject the notion that you have rights, and decide to ignore them, you can say whatever you care to say ... fat lot of good that's going to do you if they ignore you. It's really pretty simple. We all have the right not to be robbed, but try explaining that to the robber, and see how much good it will do you!
I think it's awfuly dangerous to re-classify a US citizen as an "enemy combatant" without first having proven their guilt in the court of law.
The entire idea behind behind this is contradictory to our constitution, and entire judicial system.
We've turned into a nation of cowards, so afraid of terror attacks that we are willing to give up any and all constitutional rights so we can live another day to watch "Teen Mom" while borwsing Facebook and eating a bag of Cheetos.
this seems to be a grey area created by the patriot act. interrogation by a federal official for 48 hours then the person in custody must then be mirandized.
This 48 hours is the grey area. Can they infact interrogate him and not provide him a lawyer if he requests one? do they...or are they able to contitue the interroagtion? what is the purpose of not informing him of his 5th amendment rights?
this maybe case law to challenge that provision in the patriot act.
The 48 hours only applies to reading of the rights.
Suspect still obtains the rights.
They're probably screwed as I think he's kind of unconscious and might be through the 48 hour period... I wonder how that works.
I think it's awfuly dangerous to re-classify a US citizen as an "enemy combatant" without first having proven their guilt in the court of law.
The entire idea behind behind this is contradictory to our constitution, and entire judicial system.
We've turned into a nation of cowards, so afraid of teror attacks that we are willing to give up any and all constitutional rights so we can live another day to watch "Teen Mom" while borwsing Facebook and eating a bag of Cheetos.
Disgusting.
He hasn't been classified as an enemy combatant, and it's doubtful that he will be. It's already been stated that they're going to try him in civilian court.
Nope, you are incorrect. If you are in the custody of armed men who reject the notion that you have rights, and decide to ignore them, you can say whatever you care to say ... fat lot of good that's going to do you if they ignore you. It's really pretty simple. We all have the right not to be robbed, but try explaining that to the robber, and see how much good it will do you!
Nope, you are incorrect. If you are in the custody of armed men who reject the notion that you have rights, and decide to ignore them, you can say whatever you care to say ... fat lot of good that's going to do you if they ignore you. It's really pretty simple. We all have the right not to be robbed, but try explaining that to the robber, and see how much good it will do you!
That's your OPINION only, not the law.
I prefer to avoid the hysterics and opinion, and provide the actual law/facts.
You're entitled to your opinion, that does not make what I stated incorrect.
He hasn't been classified as an enemy combatant, and it's doubtful that he will be. It's already been stated that they're going to try him in civilian court.
According to Reuters, a short bit ago, Senator Lindsey Graham is leading a big push to make sure that he be classified as such.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
