Idiots Mirandize Terrorist & He STOPS Talking!!

[Political Junky]

Outrageous. I can't believe we inform murder suspects of their rights!

The next thing you know, we will have to inform rape suspects, robbery suspects, and drunk drivers of their rights. What kind of country is this?

The HIGH VALUE DETAINEE Group was in there grilling him - they had a 42-hour window til the local judge showed up and closed it down. THIS IS nuts!! THE FBI IS OUTRAGED!

The FBI had been gone for a couple of hours when the judge showed up. He didn't barge in on the interrogation.

 

[Yurt]

yeah...who needs rights

 

[Pete7469]

He's a US citizen. He has to be mirandized. He has civil rights and I'm not willing to take them away. As reprehensible and contemptible as that little bastard is, rights aren't something we should be willing to take away.

I don't like it either but it's a principle I'll stand by. Now after his trial and inevitable conviction, he should be executed, and his corpse ground up and fed to swine, all live on Al-Jazzerra.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

He's a US citizen. He has to be mirandized. He has civil rights and I'm not willing to take them away. As reprehensible and contemptible as that little bastard is, rights aren't something we should be willing to take away.

I don't like it either but it's a principle I'll stand by. Now after his trial and inevitable conviction, he should be executed, and his corpse ground up and fed to swine, all live on Al-Jazzerra.

They had 48 hours to question him about national security before the law requires his rights be read to him. They did it in 16 hours.

Unexcusable

 

[Pete7469]

He's a US citizen. He has to be mirandized. He has civil rights and I'm not willing to take them away. As reprehensible and contemptible as that little bastard is, rights aren't something we should be willing to take away.

I don't like it either but it's a principle I'll stand by. Now after his trial and inevitable conviction, he should be executed, and his corpse ground up and fed to swine, all live on Al-Jazzerra.

They had 48 hours to question him about national security before the law requires his rights be read to him. They did it in 16 hours.

Unexcusable

Now there you might have a point but they've fucked the whole thing up all along, might as well stay consistent.

 

[OriginalShroom]

He's a US citizen. He has to be mirandized. He has civil rights and I'm not willing to take them away. As reprehensible and contemptible as that little bastard is, rights aren't something we should be willing to take away.

I don't like it either but it's a principle I'll stand by. Now after his trial and inevitable conviction, he should be executed, and his corpse ground up and fed to swine, all live on Al-Jazzerra.

They had 48 hours to question him about national security before the law requires his rights be read to him. They did it in 16 hours.

Unexcusable

I don't accept that the exception is the right way to go.

That law is wrong and needs to be repealed.

We are talking about an American Citizen who was captured on American soil.

I don't see anywhere in the Constitution that says that public outrage or that certain crimes make people exempt from the protections within it.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

He's a US citizen. He has to be mirandized. He has civil rights and I'm not willing to take them away. As reprehensible and contemptible as that little bastard is, rights aren't something we should be willing to take away.

I don't like it either but it's a principle I'll stand by. Now after his trial and inevitable conviction, he should be executed, and his corpse ground up and fed to swine, all live on Al-Jazzerra.

They had 48 hours to question him about national security before the law requires his rights be read to him. They did it in 16 hours.

Unexcusable

I don't accept that the exception is the right way to go.

That law is wrong and needs to be repealed.

We are talking about an American Citizen who was captured on American soil.

I don't see anywhere in the Constitution that says that public outrage or that certain crimes make people exempt from the protections within it.

Miranda rights are not in the constitution

 

[JakeStarkey]

Any accused has rights, period.

 

[Zoom-boing]

So why didn't they give the FBI the full 48 hours the exception allows?

 

[OriginalShroom]

They had 48 hours to question him about national security before the law requires his rights be read to him. They did it in 16 hours.

Unexcusable

I don't accept that the exception is the right way to go.

That law is wrong and needs to be repealed.

We are talking about an American Citizen who was captured on American soil.

I don't see anywhere in the Constitution that says that public outrage or that certain crimes make people exempt from the protections within it.

Miranda rights are not in the constitution

I beg to differ.

The Miranda Warnings are there to tell those under arrest or detainment by the Government of their rights, namely their 5th Amendment right not to testify against themselves.

 

[whitehall]

It's a slippery slope to allow the federal government to pick and choose which citizen will be covered by the Bill of Rights. The bomber is just as much a citizen as Bill Ayers and like it or not he should be treated the same way as any other citizen. Do away with the Miranda warning if you want to but while it is in effect it covers every citizen including bombing murdering scum.

 

[Yurt]

They had 48 hours to question him about national security before the law requires his rights be read to him. They did it in 16 hours.

Unexcusable

I don't accept that the exception is the right way to go.

That law is wrong and needs to be repealed.

We are talking about an American Citizen who was captured on American soil.

I don't see anywhere in the Constitution that says that public outrage or that certain crimes make people exempt from the protections within it.

Miranda rights are not in the constitution

while not specifically stated in the constitution, scotus correctly notes that without miranda warnings, there would be a violation of the 5th amendment right against self incrimination and the 6th amendment right to counsel.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Tsarnaev, a 19-year-old college student,

So at last, after years of fruitless searching, we have discovered the only human being within our borders who was smart enough to get into college, experienced enough to stay for a year or two....

....yet who did NOT know that he "has the right to remain silent, has the right to an attorney", etc.???

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

So why didn't they give the FBI the full 48 hours the exception allows?

You will have to ask Eric Holder that question.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I don't accept that the exception is the right way to go.

That law is wrong and needs to be repealed.

We are talking about an American Citizen who was captured on American soil.

I don't see anywhere in the Constitution that says that public outrage or that certain crimes make people exempt from the protections within it.

Miranda rights are not in the constitution

while not specifically stated in the constitution, scotus correctly notes that without miranda warnings, there would be a violation of the 5th amendment right against self incrimination and the 6th amendment right to counsel.

They had 48 hours to be within the law. They were INTENTIONALLY cut short.

WHY?

 

[Pete7469]

So why didn't they give the FBI the full 48 hours the exception allows?

I thought they had. IIRC he was arrested Friday, and it wasn't until Monday that he was read his right? Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

So why didn't they give the FBI the full 48 hours the exception allows?

I thought they had. IIRC he was arrested Friday, and it wasn't until Monday that he was read his right? Correct me if I'm wrong.

My understanding is that he had 48 hours AFTER being formally charged.

 

[Yurt]

miranda rights are not in the constitution

while not specifically stated in the constitution, scotus correctly notes that without miranda warnings, there would be a violation of the 5th amendment right against self incrimination and the 6th amendment right to counsel.

they had 48 hours to be within the law. They were intentionally cut short.

Why?

how should i know?????

 

[Zoom-boing]

So why didn't they give the FBI the full 48 hours the exception allows?

I thought they had. IIRC he was arrested Friday, and it wasn't until Monday that he was read his right? Correct me if I'm wrong.

I thought I read that the bomber was sedated and unable to answer questions for several days. He was questioned for 16 hours, not 48. Or does the exception give 48 hours total, not 48 hours of questioning (which was my initial impression)?

 

[DGS49]

Greetings from Planet Earth.

The so-called "Miranda Warnings" are not a part of the U.S. Constitution, and are not required by same. There was no rational purpose or legal justification for reading this accused person his "Miranda rights."

The "Miranda" warnings merely reflect the position of the United States Supreme Court on the usability of evidence adduced from interrogation of defendants who might not have been aware of their various rights (specifically, to legal counsel, and to remain silent). The concern, when it rationally exists, is that the suspect might reveal incriminating evidence THAT WILL BE EXCLUDED AT TRIAL, THUS THWARTING THE CONVICTION if those rights are not explained to the suspect.

But that wasn't a concern here. They already had a mountain of incriminating evidence so there was no danger of jeopardizing his conviction.

I repeat, it is not a civil rights violation, per se, to refrain from reading someone their Miranda Rights. The only downside is the possible exclusion of evidence at trial.

But in point of fact, the purpose of THIS extended interrogation here was NOT to ascertain (or reinforce) the guilt of the suspect, but rather to determine whether there might have been others who were culpable in the attack, or whether there might be continuing danger of future attacks.

It was a collosal blunder to "read him his rights," and the result was that a formerly cooperative witness was essentially discouraged from speaking further.

Reading of rights has become nothing more than a ritual, made mandatory only by universal stupidity and not by any principle of Constitutional law. Law Enforcement has an obligation to weigh, in each case, whether it is better to read the rights and silence an otherwise cooperating and informative suspect, or to refrain from doing so and possibly gain additional information. Again, the only downside of NOT reading him his rights is that some evidence may be excluded at trial - not a concern here. In this case, the stupidity of the interrogating authorities has likely resulted in the loss of significant intelligence that could conceivably have saved many, many innocent lives.

Let's hear a large Bronx Cheer for the Po-Leeeese.

Brazzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!