Active Users:524 Time:23/11/2024 10:00:44 AM
The way I see it... - Edit 1

Before modification by everynametaken at 02/06/2010 03:07:47 AM

He was informed that he didn't have to speak but chose to anyway. If you grow up in he US and you are not smart enough to ask for a lawyer then you didn't watch enough Law and Order. It is not societies responsibility to protect stupid people from themselves just to protect the rest of us from them.


Sitting there and staring at the police while they ask you questions is confrontational and uncooperative. The person can be "uncooperative" by simply saying, "I want a lawyer. Provide one for me or let me call my own."

That is the end of discussion (although there are ways around that) through the methods I mention below in my post. The police could start back in with general, unrelated conversation, make the person feel guilty or ashamed for not cooperating, and then get him/her to waive the right to an attorney.

It seems, unless I am misunderstanding that the Court has clarified that sitting silence and being a jackass does not constitute an "understood" invoking of the right to representation and to not self-incriminate. If that is the case then the Court has basically clarified that acting the fool will not get confessions thrown out later.

Seems like the right and logical ruling to me.

Return to message