Step One in destroying peoples rights..........remove the Miranda Rights

[Baron Von Murderpaws]

And this is exactly what the SCOTUS just did!



So much for justice.

 

[task0778]

Not true. Evidence gained in an interrogation prior to Mirandizing someone is still inadmissible in court, but you can't sue the cop for failure to read the arrested person his rights. It just means police will not be held accountable or be reprimanded for not reading them.

 

[progressive hunter]

Not true. Evidence gained in an interrogation prior to Mirandizing someone is still inadmissible in court, but you can't sue the cop for failure to read the arrested person his rights. It just means police will not be held accountable or be reprimanded for not reading them.

all depends on what you mean by interrogation,,, asking random questions before they are suspected is admissible,,

 

[task0778]

all depends on what you mean by interrogation,,, asking random questions before they are suspected is admissible,,

True. Or if the person volunteers information or confesses absent coercion. The Miranda warning is a constitutional rule, it is not a right. Miranda does not prohibit taking unwarned statements; it merely forbids the subsequent admission of such statements in a trial.

The Left is going apoplectic over this, but the simple truth is that you don't have to say a damn thing and once you ask for a lawyer, the questions are supposed to stop. In my view, the cop was wrong not to read the guy his Miranda rights, but failure to do so is not actionable. I would think a cop who breaks those rules is probably going to find himself out of a job, or maybe manning a desk somewhere.

 

[1srelluc]

Why should it be up to anyone else to read something to you that you should already know?

LOL.....Maybe ask the question when you are getting your driver's license or some shit, better yet make it a question on the test.