It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Supreme Court relaxes Miranda rights

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 01:25 PM
link   
How many of us grew up with the notion that the police read a suspect their rights as they are being arrested and handcuffed?
Television shows have long show that is the way it happens.

The real world is little like television crime dramas, however.


A right to remain silent and a right to a lawyer are at the top of the warnings that police recite to suspects during arrests and interrogations. But Tuesday's majority said that suspects must break their silence and tell police they are going to remain quiet to stop an interrogation, just as they must tell police that they want a lawyer.

This decision means that police can keep shooting questions at a suspect who refuses to talk as long as they want in hopes that the person will crack and give them some information, said Richard Friedman, a University of Michigan law professor.


I wonder what impact this will have on new arrest and court cases.
I know many people who feel they merely need to remain silent to invoke their rights....I'm sure many due to TV shows.


This is the third time this session that the Supreme Court has placed limits on Miranda rights, which come from a 1966 decision -- it involved police questioning of Ernesto Miranda in a rape and kidnapping case in Phoenix -- requiring officers to tell suspects they have the right to remain silent and to have a lawyer represent them, even if they can’t afford one.

Earlier this term, the high court ruled that a suspect’s request for a lawyer is good for only 14 days after the person is released from police custody -- the first time the court has placed a time limit on a request for a lawyer -- and that police do not have to explicitly tell suspects they have a right to a lawyer during an interrogation.

www.benningtonbanner.com...




posted on Jun, 5 2010 @ 04:15 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 2 2010 @ 05:32 PM
link   
High Court trims Miranda warnings.

Since this is on the Yahoo news page today I figured I would try to revitalize this thread.

I felt sick to my stomach after reading that, it signified so many things.



posted on Aug, 3 2010 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by calstorm
 


yeah I find this disturbing


Earlier this term, the high court ruled that a suspect’s request for a lawyer is good for only 14 days after the person is released from police custody -- the first time the court has placed a time limit on a request for a lawyer -- and that police do not have to explicitly tell suspects they have a right to a lawyer during an interrogation.


I'm not sure what they mean by "request is only good for 14 days" after being released, but I do know that not informing people they have a right to have an attorney present during interrogation is outrageous.

Eventually they will stop Miranda all together, just like they stopped informing juries about their right to review the law as well as the facts.

Right now a judge will fine you and lock you up for contempt if you try to inform the jury about their right to nullify law.



new topics

top topics
 
1

log in

join