Re: Supreme Court Narrows Miranda Rights, Keeps Michigan Convict in Prison
This happens all the time; officers are TRAINED to get confessions while skirting the edge of the law as much as possible.
Defense attorneys do the same thing. We have to learn to play in similar manners, however, we need to make sure we do it without violating rights or other rules. I think we do a good job of that as a whole for the most part. Personally, my department doesn't put so much stress on officers to charge someone for a crime that we have any desire to do ANYTHING to find the responsible party.
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."
Nothing is being wattered down, if anything it is clairifying an issue so that we know what is acceptable and what is not acceptable.
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.