Page 4 of 18 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 174

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

  1. #31
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

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

    Quote Originally Posted by goldcatt View Post
    Miranda has nothing to do with the right to privacy. It is a way of making sure a suspect is aware of his (or her) 5th and 6th Amendment rights when taken into custody. The specific right at issue here is the 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination, aka the right to "remain silent".
    That was a mistype, I meant to say right to remain silence.
    The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).

  2. #32
    Sage
    soccerboy22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    A warm place
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 10:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    10,723

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

    Quote Originally Posted by the makeout hobo View Post
    You don't think that them continuing to question him after he refused to answer any questions counted as him trying to invoke his right of privacy? That's how I see it. he tried to invoke his right to privacy and the police wouldn't let him.
    I mean I guess I could see it that way, but if he really didn't want to say anything ask for a lawyer.

  3. #33
    User goldcatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    10-20-10 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    58

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

    Quote Originally Posted by soccerboy22 View Post
    All he had to say was four basic words. I want a lawyer. He didn't and he was told anything you say can be used against you. Sucks for him but he has no one to blame really but himself.
    If the case were about the right to an attorney, you would be correct. But it's about the right to be "silent". Before this case there were two different standards for invoking each of those rights. A suspect in custody had to specifically ask for an attorney, and then questioning would cease. But in order to invoke silence, all he had to do is stay....silent. Makes sense, right?

    Now the Majority in this case has raised the standard for invoking silence. The right still exists, it hasn't been weakened, but now you have to ask for it.
    It could always be worse.

  4. #34
    Rockin' In The Free World
    the makeout hobo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Last Seen
    04-24-14 @ 06:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    7,102

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

    Quote Originally Posted by soccerboy22 View Post
    I mean I guess I could see it that way, but if he really didn't want to say anything ask for a lawyer.
    Right to an attorney and right to remain silent are two totally different rights. You can exercise one without the other. We're only discussing the right to remain silent, not the right to an attorney
    The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).

  5. #35
    User goldcatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    10-20-10 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    58

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

    Quote Originally Posted by soccerboy22 View Post
    I mean I guess I could see it that way, but if he really didn't want to say anything ask for a lawyer.
    Well sure, that's one way to look at it. But both rights are equally valid. Why should he have to lawyer up, when he can just be silent?
    It could always be worse.

  6. #36
    Why so serious?

    Moon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Washington State
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:46 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,285

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

    Good ruling. Once a person in police custody is read their rights, it's up to them whether or not they choose to invoke them. This person chose not to.
    "I believe in a Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings."

    --Albert Einstein, 1929

  7. #37
    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 Moon View Post
    Good ruling. Once a person in police custody is read their rights, it's up to them whether or not they choose to invoke them. This person chose not to.
    Read down through the thread which conveniently ended up with your post. Personally struggling to figure out where exactly there are any grounds for outrage/concern here. The obligation of the police is to read the Miranda rights (before any statements by the perp can be used in court against him). As long as the rights were appropriately administered the police have fulfilled their obligation.

    Never heard of any legal constraint placed on LEOs that they need to be silent....



    .

  8. #38
    Sage
    soccerboy22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    A warm place
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 10:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    10,723

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

    Quote Originally Posted by goldcatt View Post
    Well sure, that's one way to look at it. But both rights are equally valid. Why should he have to lawyer up, when he can just be silent?
    But if they keep on trying to get him to talk if he asked for a lawyer it would stop. So he really can't blame the cops for them continuing to ask him questions when if he would have asked for a lawyer the questioning would have stopped.

  9. #39
    User goldcatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    10-20-10 @ 12:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    58

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

    Quote Originally Posted by soccerboy22 View Post
    But if they keep on trying to get him to talk if he asked for a lawyer it would stop. So he really can't blame the cops for them continuing to ask him questions when if he would have asked for a lawyer the questioning would have stopped.
    If he invokes his right to silence, the questioning is also supposed to stop. The problem for law enforcement is, how do you know for sure the guy invoked his right to silence? There is no sign to tell them emphatically to stop questioning. In that way having to ask is a good thing. It puts everybody on the same page.

    On the other hand, when a suspect is read the Miranda rights it merely says he has the "right to remain silent". Logically, there is no way a suspect who doesn't seek out and read Supreme Court rulings is going to equate the right to remain silent with having to speak up and ask for silence. In that way, it's not a good thing.

    Easily solved IMO, simply change the Miranda warnings so they more or less match the new rule. Then law enforcement gets their bright(er) line and suspects still get a clear picture of their rights and how to invoke them.
    It could always be worse.

  10. #40
    Sage
    soccerboy22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    A warm place
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 10:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    10,723

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

    Quote Originally Posted by goldcatt View Post
    If he invokes his right to silence, the questioning is also supposed to stop. The problem for law enforcement is, how do you know for sure the guy invoked his right to silence? There is no sign to tell them emphatically to stop questioning. In that way having to ask is a good thing. It puts everybody on the same page.

    On the other hand, when a suspect is read the Miranda rights it merely says he has the "right to remain silent". Logically, there is no way a suspect who doesn't seek out and read Supreme Court rulings is going to equate the right to remain silent with having to speak up and ask for silence. In that way, it's not a good thing.

    Easily solved IMO, simply change the Miranda warnings so they more or less match the new rule. Then law enforcement gets their bright(er) line and suspects still get a clear picture of their rights and how to invoke them.
    I agree with majority of what you said. The right to remain silent is sort of a blurred thing because unless the suspect says I am not answering any more questions then the police don't know. And that is why I mention how I thought he should have called for a lawyer. I know they are two different rights, but when a suspect calls for a lawyer he is also saying I am not speaking anymore until the lawyer gets here and in my mind that is a way of showing his/her right to remain silent.

Page 4 of 18 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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