SCOTUS: pre-miranda silence can be used against you

[LPMan59]

News from The Associated Press

discuss.

 

[mrjarrell]

Just another brick in the police state wall that SCOTUS has been building for years. They won't be satisfied till we look like East Germany in the old days.

 

[cobber]

The right to not incriminate doesn't only kick in when you're in custody. That is simply one test the Court developed.

But if so, how about Lois Lerner, then? If not Mirandized yet, no right to not self-incriminate...

 

[Kirk Freeman]

before he was arrested or read his Miranda rights

This is pre-arrest, thus Miranda is not triggered.

And what has Uncle Kirk always told you? Right, shut your baconhole.

 

[mrjarrell]

This is pre-arrest, thus Miranda is not triggered.

And what has Uncle Kirk always told you? Right, shut your baconhole.

Unfortunately, Uncle Kirk's advice will now get you convicted.

 

[griffin]

Unfortunately, Uncle Kirk's advice will now get you convicted.

No, the guy selectively answered questions. 5A exists whether someone is Mirandized or not. Kirk is right, shut your baconhole from the very beginning.

 

[rambone]

Salinas answered some questions but did not answer when asked if a shotgun he had access to would match up with the murder weapon.

Prosecutors in Texas used his silence on that question in convicting him of murder, saying it helped demonstrate his guilt.

The article clearly says that NOT answering a question can now be used to convict.

 

[rambone]

The court decision was down its conservative/liberal split, with Alito's judgment joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia.

Liberal Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan dissented. "In my view the Fifth Amendment here prohibits the prosecution from commenting on the petitioner's silence in response to police questioning," Breyer said in the dissent.

Why do the court conservatives hate the constitution?

 

[Trigger Time]

He opened his pie hole in the first place and that's what ultimately got him convicted.
Don't say anything. I know it's against human nature but unless you want to risk the loss of your freedom (even if your innocent) then keep your mouth shut 100%.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Unfortunately, Uncle Kirk's advice will now get you convicted.

No, when I means "shut yer baconhole" I means "shut your baconhole".

The defendant tried to play the "I is so smart" game and, oddly, lost by picking and choosing the questions he answered.

Shut up. Shutting up means not "going downtown" to answer questions.

If you got a warrant you might as well come on in but I am not talking.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Why do the court conservatives hate the constitution?

Because, 1. they weren't all that happy with Miranda when it came out 45 years ago, 2. they constrain Miranda to post-arrest.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Perhaps this article from Wookie HQ will help explain:

Supreme Court Rules Fifth Amendment Has to Actually Be Invoked - Hit & Run : Reason.com

 

[88GT]

The article clearly says that NOT answering a question can now be used to convict.

No, the article clearly says that being an idiot and selectively answering some questions but not others can be used to convict.

We've had this discussion before on some level. Perhaps it was the contradictory requirement that invoking the 5th required someone to respond to questions, thus preventing him from keeping his baconhole shut entirely. But we've had this discussion.

On a side note: I've always wondered at the love affair with Miranda. I come back to that scene in one of the Shrek movies: "Donkey, you HAVE the right to remain silent. What you lack is the ability." Or something along that lines. I don't think I will ever understand the mental gymnastics used to justify a legal precedent that says that the people trying to convict you had to tell you that you had the right not to answer in the first place. The 5th has always existed. We don't need the state to be required to tell us.

 

[KLB]

No, when I means "shut yer baconhole" I means "shut your baconhole".

The defendant tried to play the "I is so smart" game and, oddly, lost by picking and choosing the questions he answered.

Shut up. Shutting up means not "going downtown" to answer questions.

If you got a warrant you might as well come on in but I am not talking.

Makes perfect sense.

 

[Cameramonkey]

The 5th has always existed. We don't need the state to be required to tell us.

WE dont need to know that because we are patriots with a clue. The miranda is for those fellow citizens who dont pay attention to whats important. (only the Kardashians, who is getting voted off the island, etc)

 

[Bunnykid68]

Baconhole, shut it.

 

[griffin]

The 5th has always existed. We don't need the state to be required to tell us.

Most Americans are stupid beyond belief.

 

[88GT]

WE dont need to know that because we are patriots with a clue. The miranda is for those fellow citizens who dont pay attention to whats important. (only the Kardashians, who is getting voted off the island, etc)

That's an excuse. What other right does the State have an obligation to remind us of?

 

[griffin]

Our right to bacon?

 

[shibumiseeker]

On a side note: I've always wondered at the love affair with Miranda. I come back to that scene in one of the Shrek movies: "Donkey, you HAVE the right to remain silent. What you lack is the ability." Or something along that lines. I don't think I will ever understand the mental gymnastics used to justify a legal precedent that says that the people trying to convict you had to tell you that you had the right not to answer in the first place. The 5th has always existed. We don't need the state to be required to tell us.

Except agents of the State used to resort to even more trickery and outright threats and actual violence to get confessions out of people, including confessions from innocent people. They still do this, but Miranda has curbed some of the more egregious violations of 5th amendment rights.