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.
I see the Lefties are making **** up again here. He wasn't read his Miranda rights LEGALLY. There is an exception for "public safety" that allows the FBI to do this. This was set up by the Obama admin to not read him his rights under that exception, then they turn around and try to act like they never made that decision. This entire administration is crooked and slimy.
A safety exception that lasts 16 hours is abusing the law.
I guess it's because of the high-profile exposure but why on earth do these kind of criminals merit the best lawyers!!??
Any nation is only as good as its justice. We operate under the belief of innocence until being proved guilty. Only a strong defense makes that idea functional.
If we are a nation of laws, our worst offenders must be proved guilty under the most strict and strongest elements of our system. It's very easy to become a nation with a corrupt justice system, and not much harder to fall all the way into mob justice, where inflamed feelings take the place of rational laws.
Get the best defender available, and if convicted, Tsarnaev is truly guilty. Here and in the eyes of the rest of the world.
We don't have the mess we saw in the conviction, the overturn, and the re-instatement of charges we now see in the Amanda Knox case. Italy's justice system seems to be very untrustworthy in comparison to ours, doesn't it?
A safety exception that lasts 16 hours is abusing the law.
It is absolutely not legal to refuse a lawyer.
I agree the administration is crooked and slimy.
They are allowed up to 48 hours. Did you know you can be detained for up to 48 hours and not be charged with a crime nor have your Miranda rights read to you because you are NOT under arrest?
A safety exception that lasts 16 hours is abusing the law.
It is absolutely not legal to refuse a lawyer.
I agree the administration is crooked and slimy.
Perfectly legal:
Quote:
Public safety exception
The Miranda rule is not, however, absolute. An exception exists in cases of "public safety". This limited and case-specific exception allows certain unadvised statements (given without Miranda warnings) to be admissible into evidence at trial when they were elicited in circumstances where there was great danger to public safety.[8]
The public safety exception derives from New York v. Quarles (1984), a case in which the Supreme Court considered the admissibility of a statement elicited by a police officer who apprehended a rape suspect who was thought to be carrying a firearm. The arrest took place during the middle of the night in a supermarket that was open to the public but apparently deserted except for the clerks at the checkout counter. When the officer arrested the suspect, he found an empty shoulder holster, handcuffed the suspect, and asked him where the gun was. The suspect nodded in the direction of the gun (which was near some empty cartons) and said, "The gun is over there". The Supreme Court found that such an unadvised statement was admissible in evidence because "[i]n a kaleidoscopic situation such as the one confronting these officers, where spontaneity rather than adherence to a police manual is necessarily the order of the day, the application of the exception we recognize today should not be made to depend on post hoc findings at a suppression hearing concerning the subjective motivation of the police officer".[9] Thus, the jurisprudential rule of Miranda must yield in "a situation where concern for public safety must be paramount to adherence to the literal language of the prophylactic rules enunciated in Miranda".
The rule of Miranda is not, therefore, absolute and can be a bit more elastic in cases of public safety.[8] Under this exception, to be admissible in the government's direct case at a trial, the questioning must not be "actually compelled by police conduct which overcame his will to resist," and must be focused and limited, involving a situation "in which police officers ask questions reasonably prompted by a concern for the public safety."[10]
In 2010, the Federal Bureau of Investigation encouraged agents to use a broad interpretation of public safety-related questions in terrorism cases, stating that the "magnitude and complexity" of terrorist threats justified "a significantly more extensive public safety interrogation without Miranda warnings than would be permissible in an ordinary criminal case," continuing to list such examples as: "questions about possible impending or coordinated terrorist attacks; the location, nature and threat posed by weapons that might pose an imminent danger to the public; and the identities, locations, and activities or intentions of accomplices who may be plotting additional imminent attacks." A Department of Justice spokesman described this position as not altering the constitutional right, but as clarifying existing flexibility in the rule.[11]
I get it. I believe everyone, even the guilty, have a right to a defense. But what kind of person does their best to prevent "just" punishment for guilty defendants simply because they are against the death penalty.
I didn't say it was illegal. But I don't really see a need for 16 hours of interrogation to find out if there are more bombs or accomplices. Of course, I'm not the FBI, and they know more than I do.
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.
