Live data from Hacker News

Why Should I Care That No One’s Reading Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights?

slate.com

211–220 of 270 posts

Re: Why Should I Care That No One’s Reading Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights?

#211
post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

| I'm just a lowly peasant who has no say in | the political process You could just start a group based around your ideas. Once you get enough people together the group becomes a political force. | Well if the FBI has to release photos to the public | for people they were already well aware of You do realize that there was a shoot-out with police, in addition to multiple other felonies committed after they released t…

"You could just start a group based around your ideas. Once you get enough people together the group becomes a political force." Well after consulting with people behind some of tech behind OWS, I doubt something like this would be effective. After all, you paint a big red x on yourself for the FBI spooks to go after, while senators and bankers call you domestic terrorists while the police and private security beat y…

Well after consulting with people behind some of tech behind OWS, I doubt something like this would be effective.

You could try doing it without calling for a war to kill everybody who disagrees with you, without turning to violence as your first resort, without trying to change the names of public parks that were named after civil rights activists, without raping the women who make the mistake of joining your movement alone and before becoming members of the protected in-crowd, without the antisemitism, without seizing or destroying public property, without trying to divide society against itself, without shitting on police cars, without demanding that other people pay for the costs of your expenses that you create, etc, etc.

TL/DR: Don't be a bunch of fascist yobs or else society might treat you like you're a bunch of fascist yobs.

Re: Why Should I Care That No One’s Reading Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights?

#212

I'm also concerned that the information (such as a confession) he gives may be rendered inadmissible in the future by the Supreme Court if it ever rules that the public safety exception was improperly applied in this interrogation.

It is not only the confession that may be rejected, but everything based on information that he gives about co-conspirators. Imagine that it was not only him and his brother, but that there is a cell of a dozen people getting money from an overseas hub that manages a wider network of AQ cells. He talks without being allowed a lawyer, and the FBI uses the information to roll up another five or six cells and seize the hub's assets in the US. When it gets to appeals court, all of the seizures and arrests can be thrown out as fruit of the poisoned tree because the warrants were based on inadmissable information from an unlawful interrogation.

Re: Why Should I Care That No One’s Reading Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights?

#213
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't really a question of a confession as much as it is Holder's DOJ has a long history of expanding the definition of the exemption. If they ask him where he's keeping any bombs, fine, but if they're doing this purely for long-term intelligence reasons above and beyond any clear or present dangers, I'm not sure if I would agree with that usage.

Huh? That'd be exactly how I'd want it to be used. Information on who his brother met with on his last trip to Russia, for example, is fairly useless in prosecuting #2, but as an intelligence lead it could be invaluable.

The exemption is fairly narrowly defined to clear and present dangers to the public. Holder has been attempting to expand the definition for years, while also trying to carve out the 5th amendment protections. It's absolutely not how the law should be applied. They can gather that information without denying the kid his rights.

Re: Why Should I Care That No One’s Reading Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights?

#214
As I understand it, even though they haven't Mirandized him, all that means is if he confesses that confession still won't be admissible. They probably didn't Mirandize him because they don't care 1 bit about getting confession, they want to be sure if there's anyone else out there that is planning attacks they get that info from him. Getting info about whether he's guilty doesn't matter, because he's super fucking guilty.

Re: Why Should I Care That No One’s Reading Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights?

#215
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both set a precedent for violations of Constitutional rights.

What exact constitutional right is violated?

The Miranda rights apply to multiple constitutional amendments (4th and 5th, others indirectly) from the Bill of Rights, and it is also the constitution that states the Supreme Court decision for which they are named is law, and the only binding interpretation for how those amendments are to be applied.

In short, the Supreme Court ruled that not informing suspects of these rights violated the amendments, and the Constitution itself says they have the right to do that.

Re: Why Should I Care That No One’s Reading Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights?

#216

You shouldn't care. Because not reading someone under arrest the Miranda warning is constitutionally irrelevant in and of itself. It only acquires relevance if the government seeks to have the statements admitted at trial. Discussing the similar case of Faisal Shahzad, who attempted to bomb Times Square, Orin Kerr, a law professor who is an expert on the 4th Amendment wrote: "Importantly, though, it would not have vi…

This isn't correct.

The public safety exemption to Miranda rights DOES allow the results of questioning to be used as evidence. That is what is happening here.

This exception stems from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_v._Quarles

Re: Why Should I Care That No One’s Reading Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights?

#217
post #54

I'm more concerned that Lindsey Graham and John McCain are hoping to declare this kid an "Enemy Combatant"

After attacking the president's legalese regarding hypothetical drone strikes on citizens. Political theatre, the lot of it.

Not McCain. He strongly criticized Rand's filibuster.

Re: Why Should I Care That No One’s Reading Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights?

#218
post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

| a way to just skirt civil liberties when | it seems relevant That's exactly what it is, with good reason. When this is used, we are saying that the rights of others trump the rights of this suspect. When we're talking about the possibility of active bombs hidden within a civilian population, I would think it's a no-brainer that the rights of the people to not be blown up trumps the suspect's rights. Also, as @anigb…

> When this is used, we are saying that the rights of others trump the rights of this suspect. When we're talking about the possibility of active bombs hidden within a civilian population, I would think it's a no-brainer that the rights of the people to not be blown up trumps the suspect's rights. Jesus this is scary thinking. You're saying the rights of a suspect go out the window when we can contrive a situation wh…

[deleted]

Re: Why Should I Care That No One’s Reading Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights?

#219
post #90
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will not hear his Miranda rights before the FBI questions him Friday night" [id.] This implies he'll be going through a potentially long interrogation with the FBI that may be admittable as evidence, without having been given a Miranda warning. There is definitely something about this application of the "public safety exception", and the stare decisis discussed in the article, that gives cause for…

>This implies he'll be going through a potentially long interrogation with the FBI that may be admittable as evidence, without having been given a Miranda warning. Any statements before the Miranda warning are inadmissable in court: http://www.volokh.com/2010/05/05/shahzad-and-miranda-rights/

> Any statements before the Miranda warning are inadmissable in court:

That is completely false, and suggests you haven't read anything in this entire thread discussing these issues, including the link you link to.

Re: Why Should I Care That No One’s Reading Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights?

#220
For someone from the civilized world, there is a clear way from "innocent" to "convicted": through a conviction.

Only a court can convict someone.

Only a convicted person may be legally punished.

Before a conviction can occur, there must be suspicion, and most probably an arrest. A suspect is still to be treated as innocent.

If you allow suspects to be punished, you allow innocents to be punished. At that point, the rule of law has ended, and your country is not part of the civilized world anymore.

Post reply on HN