Active Users:1072 Time:23/11/2024 08:50:48 AM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
Re: well the deaf can simply close their eyes and end the interview BlackAdder Send a noteboard - 02/06/2010 03:57:35 AM
Supreme Court nominee Kagan had sided with the police in this case. As solicitor general, she told the Supreme Court that the Constitution "does not require that the police interpret ambiguous statements as invocations of Miranda rights."

The amount of BS in this statement is staggering. The assumption that one has to invoke rights lest they be waived is truly ass-backwards.


You really don't understand the issues here do you? The right to remain silent is an active right not a passive one. By your logic asking a suspect a question twice would be a violation of their rights.

Well, according to SCOTUS it is an active one. I believe that is the issue at hand...

The officers in the room said Thompkins said little during the interrogation, occasionally answering "yes," "no," "I don't know," nodding his head and making eye contact as his responses. But when one of the officers asked him if he prayed for forgiveness for "shooting that boy down," Thompkins said, "Yes."

Top notch pig detective work nabs another criminal mastermind :rolleyes:


They put a man who shot and killed a boy (the person you dismiss as a "criminal mastermind";) behind bars and your well thought out response is to call them pigs and insult their results. Do you realize how little sense your response makes?

Dude, it was sarcasm. Short of torturing the guy (e.g., keeping him awake to answer questions, altering his state of consciousness to coerce him into talking), the cops can ask him questions all they want. The guy was dumb for responding.
The line of questioning is typical but also insulting to the suspect (if they had not been guilty). Very often I am asked questions by LEOs under the assumption of being guilty... it frustrates me to no end.

"In sum, a suspect who has received and understood the Miranda warnings, and has not invoked his Miranda rights, waives the right to remain silent by making an uncoerced statement to police," Kennedy said. "Thompkins did not invoke his right to remain silent and stop the questioning. Understanding his rights in full, he waived his right to remain silent by making a voluntary statement to the police. The police, moreover, were not required to obtain a waiver of Thompkins' right to remain silent before interrogating him."

I suppose I should also ask for a speedy trial. Otherwise they will assume I want a slow one now.



No but you should make more use of your right to remain silent.

Burn.

EDIT: toning it down upon reflection
This message last edited by BlackAdder on 02/06/2010 at 04:22:09 AM
Reply to message
SCOTUS Update: Right to remain silent? Suspect better speak up - trzaska2000 - 01/06/2010 07:53:14 PM 1032 Views
What I don't like about this decision... Legolas - 01/06/2010 08:21:02 PM 617 Views
I think the only potential issue is if the person didn't understand the Miranda warning. Tom - 01/06/2010 10:37:42 PM 544 Views
Damn you common sense!!! *NM* everynametaken - 02/06/2010 02:56:17 AM 245 Views
that is an odd way of looking at it random thoughts - 01/06/2010 11:58:12 PM 555 Views
I'm more referring to the almost "magic words" that Kennedy introduces here. Legolas - 02/06/2010 12:18:07 AM 577 Views
So we should not allow police to question people at all? random thoughts - 02/06/2010 12:31:27 AM 512 Views
You won't hear me complain if the Miranda rights are scaled back a bit. Legolas - 02/06/2010 12:40:23 AM 521 Views
The goal is not to keep guilty people from confessing random thoughts - 02/06/2010 01:48:48 AM 523 Views
The way I see it... everynametaken - 02/06/2010 03:06:01 AM 654 Views
Forgot to mention - the 5-4 decision was split between cons and libs, but..... trzaska2000 - 01/06/2010 08:36:41 PM 536 Views
Seems reasonable to me scalius - 01/06/2010 09:44:30 PM 646 Views
This seems reasonable to me. Joel - 01/06/2010 09:47:34 PM 578 Views
I'm stunned. Your response was reasoned, logical and concise. What have you done with Joel? Tom - 01/06/2010 10:43:22 PM 553 Views
It's been a long weekend; I'm tired. Joel - 02/06/2010 01:38:32 AM 646 Views
Joel is going to be so pissed when he finds out that you logged onto his account..... trzaska2000 - 02/06/2010 01:42:50 AM 561 Views
I'm not saying another word until my lawyer is here! Joel - 02/06/2010 02:02:12 AM 659 Views
Hey deaf people who can't speak... pound sand. BlackAdder - 01/06/2010 09:55:41 PM 637 Views
well the deaf can simply close their eyes and end the interview random thoughts - 02/06/2010 12:26:31 AM 541 Views
Re: well the deaf can simply close their eyes and end the interview BlackAdder - 02/06/2010 03:57:35 AM 561 Views
you are often questioned by the police? What are you doing to make that happen? random thoughts - 02/06/2010 03:35:47 PM 573 Views
I travel internationally BlackAdder - 02/06/2010 08:40:38 PM 561 Views
This decision is a setback for us all. PerrinWT - 01/06/2010 10:10:51 PM 658 Views
No it isn't. Tom - 01/06/2010 10:42:06 PM 579 Views
Re: No it isn't. PerrinWT - 01/06/2010 11:26:07 PM 589 Views
bah damookster - 02/06/2010 12:11:46 AM 545 Views
Teach people to say "I'm not saying anything until my lawyer gets here." Period. *NM* Tom - 02/06/2010 12:38:24 AM 232 Views
Close, but not cigar. PerrinWT - 02/06/2010 01:30:19 AM 595 Views
if they catch more bad guys is that a bad thing? *NM* random thoughts - 02/06/2010 01:50:12 AM 248 Views
Would you be okay with the prohibition of firearms if it lowered the crime rate? Ghavrel - 02/06/2010 02:18:26 AM 544 Views
I think you have to have reasonable balance random thoughts - 02/06/2010 05:48:31 PM 633 Views
You are at the intersection of bull and shit. Tom - 02/06/2010 04:00:32 PM 579 Views
Re: You are at the intersection of bull and shit. PerrinWT - 02/06/2010 10:18:36 PM 579 Views
Hey douchebag, you're still wrong. Tom - 02/06/2010 10:34:48 PM 557 Views
Any particular reason you started the name calling? ironclad - 02/06/2010 10:58:47 PM 495 Views
At what point did that happen? Aemon - 02/06/2010 01:26:13 AM 526 Views
This is what I alluded to in my response. Joel - 02/06/2010 01:44:14 AM 604 Views
Re: At what point did that happen? PerrinWT - 02/06/2010 01:48:52 AM 627 Views
I am confused Camilla - 01/06/2010 11:09:14 PM 568 Views
Re: I am confused PerrinWT - 01/06/2010 11:15:07 PM 493 Views
ummm, no... damookster - 02/06/2010 12:13:59 AM 600 Views
Re: ummm, no... PerrinWT - 02/06/2010 01:38:54 AM 531 Views
spare me the pontificating damookster - 02/06/2010 01:50:27 AM 630 Views
Re: spare me the pontificating PerrinWT - 02/06/2010 02:01:27 AM 512 Views
you never wave your right to remain silent forever random thoughts - 02/06/2010 01:53:07 AM 503 Views
It's perhaps odd that we're on opposite sides of this. Joel - 02/06/2010 01:59:46 AM 545 Views
Nothing has changed random thoughts - 02/06/2010 01:56:08 AM 530 Views
Except you risk waiving them unless you specifically say you want to use them. BlackAdder - 02/06/2010 04:07:51 AM 538 Views
not surprising that people who use phrases like "Police State of America" believe that random thoughts - 02/06/2010 03:24:25 PM 552 Views
As far as I can tell, this changes nothing and simply maintains the status quo. LiterateDog - 01/06/2010 11:27:36 PM 560 Views
An interesting way of looking at it at the end. Joel - 02/06/2010 02:05:34 AM 621 Views
For those who don't understand the techniques of police interrogation let me make this clear. everynametaken - 02/06/2010 01:57:51 AM 598 Views
Good advice BlackAdder - 02/06/2010 04:00:45 AM 503 Views
I always love in the TV shows when... everynametaken - 02/06/2010 04:16:35 AM 588 Views
Re: I always love in the TV shows when... BlackAdder - 02/06/2010 04:36:34 AM 681 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes