Breaking News...FAR right wing Supreme Court strikes down Miranda rights 5-4

[Liability]

i'm sure that the national association of criminal defense attorneys is a completely unbiased source.

To a statist, any excuse will do. Wear it proudly, it matches your pea brain.

BTW del, did you go to school with anyone who became a cop? I did, they were the thugs that were always in trouble with the law...

Robins and Blue Jays don't nest together.

i'm sorry you've got a small penis. seek therapy.

Please tell me that bfgrn didn't post a picture of his little problem, too.

 

[del]

To a statist, any excuse will do. Wear it proudly, it matches your pea brain.

BTW del, did you go to school with anyone who became a cop? I did, they were the thugs that were always in trouble with the law...

Robins and Blue Jays don't nest together.

i'm sorry you've got a small penis. seek therapy.

Please tell me that bfgrn didn't post a picture of his little problem, too.

no, it was more of a "i can't figure out wtf his problem is" default.

for the record, i have no knowledge of bfgrn's penis or even if s/he has one.

 

[Bfgrn]

i'm sorry you've got a small penis. seek therapy.

Please tell me that bfgrn didn't post a picture of his little problem, too.

no, it was more of a "i can't figure out wtf his problem is" default.

for the record, i have no knowledge of bfgrn's penis or even if s/he has one.

Well del, YOU are the one that brought up small penis, so it belongs to the author...that would be YOU...

 

[del]

Please tell me that bfgrn didn't post a picture of his little problem, too.

no, it was more of a "i can't figure out wtf his problem is" default.

for the record, i have no knowledge of bfgrn's penis or even if s/he has one.

Well del, YOU are the one that brought up small penis, so it belongs to the author...that would be YOU...

sure, whatever your statist peabrain is happy with.

it makes no odds to me.

 

[Father Time]

Where are all the libertarians on this issue...oh, they're not libertarians, they're authoritarian conservative statists!

I'm libertarian and I believe Miranda should not be watered down in any way.

 

[Father Time]

i'm sure innocent people confess to murder all the time

You don't think the prosecutors would have a reason to intimidate false confessions out of people?

having a reason to do something isn't quite the same as doing it, is it?

how does requiring someone to affirm their intention to be silent equal intimidation?

I never said it did.

 

[Father Time]

i'm sure innocent people confess to murder all the time

December 2007, Page 30

The Problem of False Confession in America
By Richard A. Leo

In 1998 two young boys in Chicago – ages seven and eight – were charged with murdering an eleven-year-old girl named Ryan Harris. She had been badly beaten around the head, her underpants had been stuffed into her mouth, and she appeared to have been sexually assaulted. After an unrecorded interrogation, the two boys “confessed” to hitting Harris in the head with a brick (and then stuffing leaves and grass in her nose) in order to steal her bicycle. Largely because of the boys’ ages, the case attracted national media attention. The country was horrified that two prepubescent boys were capable of committing so savage a crime. Although the evidence pointed to an adult sex crime, the police insisted that the two boys were not too young to have done it, and that they knew details that could only be known to the detectives or the perpetrators.

Months later, however, the Illinois State Crime Laboratory discovered semen on Ryan Harris’ underpants – evidence that the crime could not have been committed by suspects as young as seven and eight – and prosecutors dismissed the charges. The collected DNA was later shown to match the DNA of Floyd Durr, an adult already charged with sexually assaulting three other young girls in the same neighborhood. Durr subsequently admitted being present and committing a sex act over Harris’ body.1

The Ryan Harris case is not an isolated one. Nor are false confessions limited to children or teenagers. In recent years, police have elicited a substantial number of demonstrably false confessions from adults.2 Many of these false confessions have led to erroneous prosecutions, and some have led to wrongful convictions and incarceration.3 Some of the wrongfully convicted false confessors have spent many years unjustly incarcerated before being exonerated and released; others remain behind bars.4 A number of exonerated false confessors were convicted of capital crimes and sentenced to death.5 One false confessor, Earl Washington, spent almost ten of his more than seventeen years of imprisonment on Virginia’s death row and came within nine days of being executed before being exonerated in 2001.6 Researchers and activists believe that several other innocent confessors have been executed – Edward Earl Johnson in 1987,7 Barry Lee Fairchild in 1995,8 Leo Jones in 1998,9 and Dobie Gillis Williams in 1999.10

Throughout American history, police-induced false confessions have been among the leading causes of wrongful conviction.11 It is easy to understand how beatings, torture, sleep deprivation, and threats of violence may lead an innocent suspect to falsely confess. Yet with psychological interrogation methods, the idea that an innocent person would confess to a crime he did not commit – particularly to a felony that carries the possibility of a lengthy prison sentence or even the death penalty – is highly counter-intuitive.12
The Problem of False Confession in America

i'm sure that the national association of criminal defense attorneys is a completely unbiased source.

Well who else would know about false confessions more than they do?

You think the prosecutors or the cops would ever admit to it?

 

[del]

December 2007, Page 30

The Problem of False Confession in America
By Richard A. Leo

In 1998 two young boys in Chicago – ages seven and eight – were charged with murdering an eleven-year-old girl named Ryan Harris. She had been badly beaten around the head, her underpants had been stuffed into her mouth, and she appeared to have been sexually assaulted. After an unrecorded interrogation, the two boys “confessed” to hitting Harris in the head with a brick (and then stuffing leaves and grass in her nose) in order to steal her bicycle. Largely because of the boys’ ages, the case attracted national media attention. The country was horrified that two prepubescent boys were capable of committing so savage a crime. Although the evidence pointed to an adult sex crime, the police insisted that the two boys were not too young to have done it, and that they knew details that could only be known to the detectives or the perpetrators.

Months later, however, the Illinois State Crime Laboratory discovered semen on Ryan Harris’ underpants – evidence that the crime could not have been committed by suspects as young as seven and eight – and prosecutors dismissed the charges. The collected DNA was later shown to match the DNA of Floyd Durr, an adult already charged with sexually assaulting three other young girls in the same neighborhood. Durr subsequently admitted being present and committing a sex act over Harris’ body.1

The Ryan Harris case is not an isolated one. Nor are false confessions limited to children or teenagers. In recent years, police have elicited a substantial number of demonstrably false confessions from adults.2 Many of these false confessions have led to erroneous prosecutions, and some have led to wrongful convictions and incarceration.3 Some of the wrongfully convicted false confessors have spent many years unjustly incarcerated before being exonerated and released; others remain behind bars.4 A number of exonerated false confessors were convicted of capital crimes and sentenced to death.5 One false confessor, Earl Washington, spent almost ten of his more than seventeen years of imprisonment on Virginia’s death row and came within nine days of being executed before being exonerated in 2001.6 Researchers and activists believe that several other innocent confessors have been executed – Edward Earl Johnson in 1987,7 Barry Lee Fairchild in 1995,8 Leo Jones in 1998,9 and Dobie Gillis Williams in 1999.10

Throughout American history, police-induced false confessions have been among the leading causes of wrongful conviction.11 It is easy to understand how beatings, torture, sleep deprivation, and threats of violence may lead an innocent suspect to falsely confess. Yet with psychological interrogation methods, the idea that an innocent person would confess to a crime he did not commit – particularly to a felony that carries the possibility of a lengthy prison sentence or even the death penalty – is highly counter-intuitive.12
The Problem of False Confession in America

i'm sure that the national association of criminal defense attorneys is a completely unbiased source.

Well who else would know about false confessions more than they do?

You think the prosecutors or the cops would ever admit to it?

no, i don't. that doesn't mean that a defense attorney isn't going to shade things his way-that's what they're paid to do.

requiring someone to say "i wish to invoke my right to remain silent" or words to that effect, just doesn't seem quite the same as beating a confession out of them with a rubber hose. excuse me for not being able to work up a nice frothy head of angst over it.

of course, i'm a STATIST and a peabrain

 

[Intense]

Do the American people need any MORE evidence right wing America is ANTI-freedom? What NEXT, guilty until proven innocent???

Court: Suspects must say they want to be silent

By JESSE J. HOLLAND (AP) – 1 hour ago

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that suspects must explicitly tell police they want to be silent to invoke Miranda protections during criminal interrogations, a decision one dissenting justice said turns defendants' rights "upside down."

A right to remain silent and a right to a lawyer are the first of the Miranda rights warnings, which police recite to suspects during arrests and interrogations. But the justices said in a 5-4 decision that suspects must tell police they are going to remain silent to stop an interrogation, just as they must tell police that they want a lawyer.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the court's newest member, wrote a strongly worded dissent for the court's liberals, saying the majority's decision "turns Miranda upside down."

"Criminal suspects must now unambiguously invoke their right to remain silent — which counter-intuitively, requires them to speak," she said. "At the same time, suspects will be legally presumed to have waived their rights even if they have given no clear expression of their intent to do so. Those results, in my view, find no basis in Miranda or our subsequent cases and are inconsistent with the fair-trial principles on which those precedents are grounded."

Well, it looks to me like you need to spend more time advising the public about proper use of their rights, and less time bitching about what is obvious to the rest of us. Here is another one, don't lie, say nothing. Ask for council. Do not do the prosecutors job for him.

The sky is falling!!! The sky is falling!!! ..... I don't think so.

 

[editec]

Amazing.

The SCOTUS is nuts.

 

[Intense]

Wait until they reverse ObamaCare

and declare America an OFFICIAL CHRISTIAN nation

so only christians will have rights

Don't you think you just might be over reacting a bit?

 

[Bfgrn]

Where are all the libertarians on this issue...oh, they're not libertarians, they're authoritarian conservative statists!

I'm libertarian and I believe Miranda should not be watered down in any way.

I was talking about DUDe, the far right wing 'Grover Norquist' libertarian, Kevin Kennedy and the Rand Paul crowd busy defending the rights of racists.

 

[Intense]

Unfortunately, there are two groups of people that know the law inside out. And innocent people are not one of them.

Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.
Thomas Jefferson

So the guilty know they need to keep their mouths shut better then anyone else is what your saying. And miranda is for the innocent?

I think miranda is something for the guilty to use to try and get off.

Did the thought ever cross your little pea brain mind that there are policeman that are not honest? HOW should the laws protect us from them? These are issues for adults. You don't qualify...

I don't trust Anyone that pay's union dues, unless I know them.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I was talking about DUDe, the far right wing 'Grover Norquist' libertarian, Kevin Kennedy and the Rand Paul crowd busy defending the rights of racists.

Racists don't have rights?

 

[goldcatt]

I was talking about DUDe, the far right wing 'Grover Norquist' libertarian, Kevin Kennedy and the Rand Paul crowd busy defending the rights of racists.

Racists don't have rights?

Of course they do. Rights that stop, just like everybody else's, when they infringe on the rights of another. But there's a whole other forum to go over those details in.

 

[George Costanza]

Well, it looks to me like you need to spend more time advising the public about proper use of their rights, and less time bitching about what is obvious to the rest of us. Here is another one, don't lie, say nothing. Ask for council. Do not do the prosecutors job for him.

The sky is falling!!! The sky is falling!!! ..... I don't think so.

You don't seem to see this as a major problem, largely on the assumption that all that needs to be done is advise the public about the proper use of their rights. Would that it were that simple.

It is one thing to sit back and calmly analyze this situation abstractly, when you are not at all involved in it on a personal level. It is quite another when you have been arrested, are seated in the "interview" room and a slick detective is telling you that they have you dead to rights and your ONLY hope to avoid spending years in prison is to tell him "your side of it."

Confronted with something like that, most people will talk, regardless of how "well informed" they were of their rights, going in. They will talk out of pure, self interest. They will talk because they are convinced that, unless they do, the police and the prosecutor will put them away forever.

And, in extreme situations, innocent people will confess to crimes they did not commit because they are convinced that if they do confess, they will receive a light sentence whereas if they don't, they will be severely punished. Why do they become convinced of that? Because that's what the police tell them in order to get them to confess.

 

[Intense]

Did the thought ever cross your little pea brain mind that there are policeman that are not honest? HOW should the laws protect us from them? These are issues for adults. You don't qualify...

Again a very simple concept, personal responsibility. Or is that concept hard to understand for an adult?

Personal responsibility is a bogus argument. Laws should not be a chinese finger. Do you understand the presumption of innocence and how that separates our system from police states?

What is totally mind-boggling is this ruling is something we'd expect from a Communist regime, not an American Supreme Court.

You right wing pea brains THINK you're tough on crime, but all you're really tough on is freedom and liberty. It is what blind statists believe...their beloved state and it's agents are never in error.

It is more dangerous that even a guilty person should be punished without the forms of law than that he should escape.
Thomas Jefferson

Pretty reactionary and biased, opinion there Kingmosabi!!! Hiho Ho Silver and away and all. Do you carry a warning sign at work? Might want to apply that prejudgment to yourself, just a bit.

 

[Bfgrn]

Do the American people need any MORE evidence right wing America is ANTI-freedom? What NEXT, guilty until proven innocent???

Court: Suspects must say they want to be silent

By JESSE J. HOLLAND (AP) – 1 hour ago

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that suspects must explicitly tell police they want to be silent to invoke Miranda protections during criminal interrogations, a decision one dissenting justice said turns defendants' rights "upside down."

A right to remain silent and a right to a lawyer are the first of the Miranda rights warnings, which police recite to suspects during arrests and interrogations. But the justices said in a 5-4 decision that suspects must tell police they are going to remain silent to stop an interrogation, just as they must tell police that they want a lawyer.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the court's newest member, wrote a strongly worded dissent for the court's liberals, saying the majority's decision "turns Miranda upside down."

"Criminal suspects must now unambiguously invoke their right to remain silent — which counter-intuitively, requires them to speak," she said. "At the same time, suspects will be legally presumed to have waived their rights even if they have given no clear expression of their intent to do so. Those results, in my view, find no basis in Miranda or our subsequent cases and are inconsistent with the fair-trial principles on which those precedents are grounded."

Well, it looks to me like you need to spend more time advising the public about proper use of their rights, and less time bitching about what is obvious to the rest of us. Here is another one, don't lie, say nothing. Ask for council. Do not do the prosecutors job for him.

The sky is falling!!! The sky is falling!!! ..... I don't think so.

Actually it IS...

U.S. prison population dwarfs that of other nations

The United States has less than 5 percent of the world's population. But it has almost a quarter of the world's prisoners.

Indeed, the United States leads the world in producing prisoners, a reflection of a relatively recent and now entirely distinctive American approach to crime and punishment. Americans are locked up for crimes — from writing bad checks to using drugs — that would rarely produce prison sentences in other countries. And in particular they are kept incarcerated far longer than prisoners in other nations.

Criminologists and legal scholars in other industrialized nations say they are mystified and appalled by the number and length of American prison sentences.

Non-Violent Offenses Leads United States to World's Highest Incarceration Rate

The United States has the highest incarceration rate amongst any country in the world, including China, Iran, Russia or any other socialistic country. Of every 99 people in America, 1 of them is in jail. That is 1.6 million of your fellow Americans. This is an increase of 25,000 prisoners within the last year and an increase of 1 million in the last 20 years. The increase is blamed on mandatory sentencing, non-violent crime incarceration, and three strike policies.

Last year 49 billion dollars nationwide was spent on correction facilities, 4 times the amount spent 20 years ago. This is 60% of what federal and state governments spend on higher education, double the ratio for 1987. California taxpayers spend nearly 35,000 dollars per inmate for housing. One of the worst states, Oregon, spends 1.6 billion, which is nearly 10.9% of the state's general funds budget. Also in Oregon, 174 million more dollars are spent on jails than college education. College education is important because states with a higher college enrollment rate experience a lower violent crime rate. The top 10 college enrollment states averaged 276 violent crimes per 100,000 people, while the lowest 10 states averaged 440 violent crimes per 100,000 people.

U.S. Leads World In Child Incarceration

Amnesty International Report Condemns U.S. Child Injustice

More than half of kids prosecuted as adults are there for nonviolent offenses. Over 89,000 kids a year thrown into solitary confinement for more than a day.

US leads world in jailing children for life

THE United States has far more juveniles serving life terms than any other country — 2387. Israel, the only other country that imprisons juveniles for life, according to a new study by the University of San Francisco's Centre for Law & Global Justice, has seven.

LewRockwell.com

 

[George Costanza]

So the guilty know they need to keep their mouths shut better then anyone else is what your saying. And miranda is for the innocent?

I think miranda is something for the guilty to use to try and get off.

Did the thought ever cross your little pea brain mind that there are policeman that are not honest? HOW should the laws protect us from them? These are issues for adults. You don't qualify...

Again a very simple concept, personal responsibility. Or is that concept hard to understand for an adult?

If personal responsibility was the answer, we wouldn't need the Miranda decision at all.

Our entire, criminal justice system is based on the assumption that the State is so powerful, and the individual so helpless against it, that certain safeguards must exist to protect the individual from the power of the State. Very few people, if any, can be (or are) prepared for what they will be confronted with once they are arrested on a criminal charge. And even those who have had some experience with it generally agree to talk to the police following arrest, in the mistaken belief that the police are only interested in getting the truth and the truth will set them free (to borrow a phrase).

No, my friend - "personal responsibility" has no relevance whatsoever when it comes to the power of the State v. the individual.

 

[Bfgrn]

i'm sure that the national association of criminal defense attorneys is a completely unbiased source.

Well who else would know about false confessions more than they do?

You think the prosecutors or the cops would ever admit to it?

no, i don't. that doesn't mean that a defense attorney isn't going to shade things his way-that's what they're paid to do.

requiring someone to say "i wish to invoke my right to remain silent" or words to that effect, just doesn't seem quite the same as beating a confession out of them with a rubber hose. excuse me for not being able to work up a nice frothy head of angst over it.

of course, i'm a STATIST and a peabrain

Unfortunately del, your epiphany will only occur when you are at the end of the rubber hose. How many innocent people in prison is acceptable to you del. If it is only one, will YOU take their place? If NOT, then you ARE a statist, a pea brain and a phony.

It behooves every man who values liberty of conscience for himself, to resist invasions of it in the case of others: or their case may, by change of circumstances, become his own.
Thomas Jefferson