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

Post by anigbrowl » Sat, Apr 20, 2013, 8:17 PM UTC

mcantelon wrote: post #225

anigbrowl wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For heaven's sake. Assuming that they have arrested the correct person, he and his brother had a stack of tactical explosives that they were throwing around with abandon, as well as having bombed a major public event with loss of life and a huge level of injury. Of course the public (via its designated law enforcement agents) has a legitimate interest in establishing whether all possible explosive devices have been f…

>There'll be camera footage from the 7-11 that they held up They didn't hold up the 7-11. http://www.wbur.org/2013/04/15/live-blog-multiple-explosions...

Post by anigbrowl » Sat, Apr 20, 2013, 8:23 PM UTC

guelo wrote: post #201

anigbrowl wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For heaven's sake. Assuming that they have arrested the correct person, he and his brother had a stack of tactical explosives that they were throwing around with abandon, as well as having bombed a major public event with loss of life and a huge level of injury. Of course the public (via its designated law enforcement agents) has a legitimate interest in establishing whether all possible explosive devices have been f…

Imagine that the guy knows his Miranda rights, refuses to talk and demands a lawyer. The unsaid implication of the supposed public-safety exception is that the police will do anything to get the guy to talk, constitution be damned.

Post by tomrod » Sat, Apr 20, 2013, 9:03 PM UTC

youngerdryas wrote: post #187

mcgwiz wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I will add that, in the absence of the Executive Branch making such a substantial signal (as opposed to the rhetorical signals in Obama's speech), at least the "fourth branch" has shone a light on the matter. It is a weak light no doubt, and is characteristic of the spineless institution of local broadcast journalism, but the fact that the issue was mentioned at all implies an evolution of the American psyche…

>regain a fraction of international moral stature By reading him his miranda rights? He is going to be put to death. The US doesn't need to engender sympathy it needs a credible peer.

Post by late2part » Sat, Apr 20, 2013, 9:52 PM UTC

statictype wrote: post #158

newbie12 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, Miranda means they don't have to answer questions and they can have a lawyer present.

No. They have those rights whether or not the police remembers to verbally inform the suspect. The suspect has every right to remain silent and every right to an attorney, even if the officer detaining him chooses not to remind him about it.

Post by baddox » Sat, Apr 20, 2013, 10:13 PM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #147

baddox wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's as simple as saying "the rights of others trump the rights of this suspect," then why not torture the suspect?

Because it's not simple. There are interests to be balanced and you can bet that defense counsel will challenge that decision pre-trial, at trial, and at appeal - and rightly so, it's not something that should be used with impunity. Although creative writers love to put law enforcement characters on the horns of dilemmas like this because it makes for great drama, in real life the PIE does not get invoked that often…