Page 18 of 18 FirstFirst ... 8161718
Results 171 to 174 of 174

Thread: Supreme Court: Suspects must invoke right to remain silent in interrogations

  1. #171
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: Supreme Court Narrows Miranda Rights, Keeps Michigan Convict in Prison

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    And you would be misplacing your frustration if you did. It has everything to do with the evidence of the case. The evidence submitted in the case comes in the form of that paperwork and it is imperative that it be filled out properly just like it would be for the citizen under suspicion to show his proper evidence. If the form is not completed according to procedure, then by all means, it and any fruit of that poisonous tree must be removed entirely from the evidence. At that case, the dismissal is for lack of evidence.


    Does it suck for the cop who had a clean collar otherwise? Absolutely. But the balance of power between the citizen and his government is so disparate that it is imperative the government be held to such standards in all things lest it gain too much control and abuse the authority it has.
    The refusal of a judge to receive evidence in a case is a failure on the judges behalf, not that of the prosecution.
    The refusal of the judge to allow the public website's information to be used is a loophole.

    The addition of ink on a piece of paper does not mean the person is not guilty of a crime.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  2. #172
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court Narrows Miranda Rights, Keeps Michigan Convict in Prison

    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    The refusal of a judge to receive evidence in a case is a failure on the judges behalf, not that of the prosecution.
    The refusal of the judge to allow the public website's information to be used is a loophole.

    The addition of ink on a piece of paper does not mean the person is not guilty of a crime.
    No, but it does mean that the foundation of the evidence is one of shifting sand...under suspicion. Anything following that break in procedure is also under suspicion and cast under a shadow of doubt.

    That's why the procedures are in place. That's why you follow them to the letter.

  3. #173
    pawn in the game of life
    pragmatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    10-17-17 @ 05:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,984

    Re: Supreme Court Narrows Miranda Rights, Keeps Michigan Convict in Prison

    Quote Originally Posted by Groucho View Post
    And those kinds of decisions are rare indeed, and maybe that's why you hear about them from time to time instead of every day.

    I have clients who all believe they can win on those things, though. "Look, he wrote that my car is a 2005 and it's really a 2006! Can I get this thrown out?" "Um, NO."

    The problem is that some people hear about the other cases and start considering anything that frees a guilty person as a "loophole" when in fact, there may be very good Constitutional reasons why they charges were dismissed.

    I am literally finishing a brief today about a case where a young and inexperienced cop was investigating a hit and run accident. He saw tire tracks in the snow leading to my client's driveway with a sign saying "No trespassing, private property." Instead of getting a warrant however he drove up the driveway (which goes about 1/10 of a mile -- you can't see the house from the road because of all the trees) and started searching the damaged car he found. My client came out and was arrested.

    Now, if I win, does that mean he gets off on a loophole? Is the 4th amendment a loophole or a requirement?
    Good answer. Thanks. Would also be interested in hearing how "today's brief" turns out. Would never have thought that a cop in the line of duty would ever be restricted by a "no trespassing" sign. (guess we need to get some of those babies painted up over at our crack labs.... )



    .

  4. #174
    Professor
    Groucho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Pocono Mountains, PA
    Last Seen
    05-24-11 @ 03:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,363

    Re: Supreme Court Narrows Miranda Rights, Keeps Michigan Convict in Prison

    Quote Originally Posted by Cole View Post
    Good answer. Thanks. Would also be interested in hearing how "today's brief" turns out. Would never have thought that a cop in the line of duty would ever be restricted by a "no trespassing" sign. (guess we need to get some of those babies painted up over at our crack labs.... )
    No, the "no trespassing" sign merely means that the cop was aware that it was a private driveway and not a public road. Putting up a sign won't keep them off your property if they (a) have a warrant or (b) have "exigent circumstances" to enter the property absent a warrant (such as actively chasing you there!)

Page 18 of 18 FirstFirst ... 8161718

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •