Welcome to PatsFans.com

US Supreme Court: Suspects can be interrogated without lawyer

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by NEPatriot, May 27, 2009.

  1. NEPatriot

    NEPatriot Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2004
    Messages:
    7,839
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    The Associated Press: Court: Suspects can be interrogated without lawyer

    The police is more POWERFUL than EVER.
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2009
  2. maverick4

    maverick4 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    7,669
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -0

    You wouldn't look like such a partisan hypocrite, with no credibility, if you complained about the Patriot Act, wire tapping, and spying on any American while under 8 years of Bush.

    But you didn't. You're just a brainwashed, biased-no-matter-what sheep who is exactly what is wrong with this country.
     
  3. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,712
    Likes Received:
    225
    Ratings:
    +835 / 2 / -9

    Now our newly elected Prince Charming President intends to continue doing it for which I give him credit, Obama sees the danger from the Religious Savage Fanatics and he probably thinks keeping an eye on their activities is a good idea, one plane on the morning of 9/11 almost made it to Washington, Obama probably now realizes that if he doesn't tap their phones or use the Patriot Act that some day one of those airliners may come flying right through the White House windows while and his family are playing with their new puppy.

    Windbag Biden told the muslims where he's going to hide..........:singing:
     
  4. Synovia

    Synovia In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    3,922
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    The unintentional Irony here is fantastic.
     
  5. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,518
    Likes Received:
    72
    Ratings:
    +232 / 6 / -3

    #91 Jersey

    Yeah it is isn't it.
     
  6. reflexblue

    reflexblue PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2006
    Messages:
    17,518
    Likes Received:
    72
    Ratings:
    +232 / 6 / -3

    #91 Jersey

    Don't worry NEP someday you'll accidently stumble on to something viable. Look at it this way, even a blind squirrel finds a nut every once in a while.
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2009
  7. PatsWSB47

    PatsWSB47 Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,923
    Likes Received:
    92
    Ratings:
    +189 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    I guess that anticipated, semi-obligatory smack on the right from you guys would be funny except that this continues under a new left leaning administration who shows no intention of changing things up very much. What has our new President learned about world affairs that has changed his thinking so much from his campaigning days?
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2009
  8. godef

    godef In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    3,118
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    From what I understand, this concerns suspects who agree or are willing to talk; essentially, what they say cannot be withdrawn as evidence. I can't argue with that.

    Bottom line is that a suspect does not have to respond to such interrogations if his lawyer isn't present. So this presents a situation where the police can do more to intimidate the suspect, particularly the more naive or inexperienced ones. That's the scary part of this ruling.
     
  9. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    42,305
    Likes Received:
    228
    Ratings:
    +532 / 14 / -28

    From first glance it appears to be a pretty common sense decision..
     
  10. godef

    godef In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    3,118
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    Huh??? :ugh:

    This is a Supreme Court decision. Obama has barely nominated his first Supreme Court appointee...

    SO once again, we take the opportunity to jump on Obama's case over something that he has no control over. The circle jerk is going strong.
     
  11. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,553
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -0

    Don't sweat it. As usual the AP makes it sound much more broad that it really is.

    From the SCOTUS BLOG

    It's fairly inflammatory, and slightly inaccurate to say (as the AP does).

    Essentially, this ruling allows a defendant to withdraw a claim to the right to a lawyer, so long as it is initiated by the defendant.

    It pulls back and overly reaching existing ruling that basically took a defendants right to "change their mind" about representation away from them. This gives it back to them and allows police to re-question suspects if they withdraw (voluntarily) the right to representation.
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2009
  12. FreeTedWilliams

    FreeTedWilliams pfadmins PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    5,684
    Likes Received:
    144
    Ratings:
    +391 / 46 / -7

    #75 Jersey

    It was the OBAMA Justice Department who argued to get the case overtunred, get a clue.......

    I really don't think that this is that big of a deal, if you bother to read the article, the guy was in custody (which means that Miranda applies), and that he got a court appointed lawyer at his arraignment, but vouluntarily went with the Police to show them where the murder weapon was, and while doing so, wrote bascially a complete confession to the vicitm's widow (which was used against him). His lawyer was (and probably rightfully so) irate when the guy got back to his cell.

    The only thing that bothers me about this, is that the guy obvioulsy cooperated, and yet, they still gave him the death penalty!!! Any semi-competent lawyer would have at the very least gotten the death penalty off the table before he agreed to have his client cooperate in anyway.
     
  13. PatsWSB47

    PatsWSB47 Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    7,923
    Likes Received:
    92
    Ratings:
    +189 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    True about this being a supreme court case but it blends in nicely with how Obama's back tracking on these liberty issues he so strongly campaigned on. He has the bulley pulpit and does have authority on some things. Patriot act is still intact, tribunals still intact, photos not released, still has authority to order enhanced interogation etc. I'm not on his case BTW. I'm trying to point out that he's he's got some real world education now and is governing accordingly.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2009
  14. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,867
    Likes Received:
    349
    Ratings:
    +737 / 11 / -7

    Me, I don't like it a whole hell of a lot. You always want to "get" that guy you know is guilty, but you only have inadmissible evidence... It's never "fair" that one time... but this decision will pretty much give the police another tool, that of "voluntary" information before a lawyer's arrival. I doubt it stops at "voluntary" chats with no pressure or coercion. "I'm not talking to you until my lawyer arrives." "Oh we get it, we wanted to help you out, we thought you were a standup guy, but you're lawyering up like a scumbag and hiding behind the constitution...."

    Well, I guess it gives a bunch of "Law and Order" scriptwriters something to study up on this offseason...
     
  15. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,553
    Likes Received:
    19
    Ratings:
    +34 / 0 / -0

    That is not really what this ruling states, but that's okay ;)

    Many people, including the Obama Justice Dept. have LONG felt that Michigan v. Jackson was too broad in it's definition. SCOTUS agreed with the arguements. It's not overly surprising, nor overly damaging to defendants.

    I doupt many Law and Order shows will be generated by this ruling. :rolleyes:
     
  16. efin98

    efin98 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2009
    Messages:
    5,090
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    But that questioning can only be initiated by the suspect...they can stop or choose how in depth they want to go and the police at any time, essentially it just give some leeway for the police but still hinders them.

    It is a victory for police but not a full victory.
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2009
  17. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,712
    Likes Received:
    225
    Ratings:
    +835 / 2 / -9

    With my reputation I'm afraid to say the "M" word..........................

    Religious Fanatics As In (off with their heads)
     
  18. godef

    godef In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    3,118
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    The thing some folks have a hard time understanding is that the laws concerning Mirnada rights and other laws which make it difficult to prosecute the guy we know is guilty were all created in response to police abuse, in cases where they thought they knew somebody was guilty and made up evidence that they couldn't otherwise find, only to find out they were wrong all along. A classic case of that happened right here in Boston, I believe the real guilty party's name was Bennett (someone help me here, I keep wanting to say William Bennett; the guy who murdered his pregnant wife and blamed it on an unknown black man, and the police subsequently harrassed a particular until they learned the truth; Mark Wahlberg rapped about it).
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>