I was involved ina case once. I was arrested and made it clear I will wait for my attorney to get there to answer any questions.
A few hours later they put me in a room with a cop. He proceded to say this. "I know you are playing the game you want to play it but I have to tell you that everybody I go after I put in jail." His refference of my rights as a game disturbed me.
He knew I had requested my attorney but he was there to threaten me that if I didn't give up my rights he would do whatever it took to put me in jail. Just using statistics it is impossible taht 100% of suspects he went after were guilty. He didn't care about my rights and I would bet many cops are the same.
I find it hard to beleive that somebody that had been interrogated for 8 or 10 hours never asked for an attorney.
This was a murder case, all murder case interviews in ALL states in the US require video recording of the interview room.
If the defendant had asked for an attorney during this time, it would have been known.
This happens all the time; officers are TRAINED to get confessions while skirting the edge of the law as much as possible.
I had a case once where the officer basically told my client "You can either confess to me and I'll let you go or I can arrest you now and take you out of here in handcuffs in front of all your friends." When she said she wanted to see a lawyer, he said "OK, but this is your last chance. If you want a lawyer, I'll arrest you first and then you can talk to him."
I got her confession suppressed and won after the DA appealed it, too. (Here's a link to the Superior Court's opinion: Pennsylvania Superior Court Cases - Superior Court Case Law from PA - Pennsylvania Superior Court - unoffical reports - þÿ)
The point though is that many many times suspects are coerced to confess in exchange for a promise to be treated nicer or not have as many charges filed, and they do so. But I wonder how consensual that really is. They don't know whether the cop is telling the truth about what charges could have been filed, for instance.
So anything that waters down these rights is bad, in my opinion. If someone is not talking or cooperating, it's pretty clear they don't want to talk. I don't know why they need to specifically say "By the way, in case you can't tell, I am exercising my right to not talk by not talking."
Read my books! http://michaelaventrella.com
Nothing is being wattered down, if anything it is clairifying an issue so that we know what is acceptable and what is not acceptable.So anything that waters down these rights is bad, in my opinion. If someone is not talking or cooperating, it's pretty clear they don't want to talk. I don't know why they need to specifically say "By the way, in case you can't tell, I am exercising my right to not talk by not talking."
Speaking to inform somone that you do not wish to be a witness against yourself is NOT being a witness against yourself.
The Miranda warnings "right to remain silent" is a bit retarded, those words shouldn't be used to be honest because they do not convey the 5th amendment very well. You do NOT have the right to remain silent really, as has been upheld by the court when it comes to being asked basic booking questions.
So yeah, stay "silent" all you want, but your ass is never getting out of jail on pre-trial release until you SPEAK and answer the freaking booking questions so you can be processed.
I always get a chuckle out of people who think they understand the legal system when they are sitting in a holding cell for hours until they decide they want to start cooperating with the arrest process.
Those who are dissenting with this decision have a weak position that is not based on the Constitution itself, but is based upon a phrase used in the miranda decision that should not have made it there to start with.
Personally I find miranda to be a ****ty decision, not because I want to violate rights, because I don't. Its because I don't understand how the supreme court could interpret somewhere in the constitution that it be a requirement for officers to give a civics lesson to those we intent to interview for purposes of a criminal investigation.
"I can explain it to you but, I can't understand it for you"