Suspect Was Not Read Miranda Rights

[CathyInBlue]

This will quite possibly be the litmus for NDAA, the loss of habeus corpus, and the indefinite detention of American citizens without charge, representation or trial.

I wonder how many people who decried all of this will now suddenly be okay with it because "OH MY GOD A TERRORIST!"

Regardless of what was done, every US citizen deserves Constitutional protections once the immediate threat is over. How this joker was granted citizenship is certainly up for discussion, but once granted he's protected or at least should be.

Tim Mcveigh was dispatched with great efficiency without having to send him to Gitmo. The law/courts can deal with this as well.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Numbah One son, Tamerlan the only one who'd achieved American citizenship status? And he's already dead. That means Numbah Two son, Dzhokhar is NOT an American citizen, so screw him. Interrogate him after they put him under the prison for all I care.

Edit: Mea Culpa. I had it backwards. The dead one was not an American citizen, Dzhokhar [sic] is. That means he's deserving of full Miranda protections. Anything they do to him, they are saying they can do to any of us native-borns.

 

[public servant]

Do terrorists fall under the criminal label or the enemy combatant label? Are the latter due Miranda rights?

Enemy combatant and no they are not due Miranda.

 

[rambone]

Citizen, non-citizen, it doesn't matter. Existing U.S. law allows anyone to be detained by the military, held indefinitely, and denied access to a lawyer. Senator Lindsey Graham made it clear that the whole world is a battlefield and the rules of war will now be used in the homeland. The only difference between *you* and a guy getting tortured and indefinitely detained in Guantanamo Bay is a secret accusal by a shadowy government agency.

If NDAA is followed according to Senator Graham, the captured suspect will be told, "SHUT UP, YOU DON'T GET A LAWYER."

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCII9_Ctz_w[/ame]

 

[jbombelli]

Everyone saying he's an enemy combatant... What specific enemy organization is he a part of? With whom, exactly, are we at war? On what "battlefield" was he captured?

 

[Expat]

Boston Bomber Posted Video on 'The Black Flags From Khorasan' | The Weekly Standard

We know they have posted some apparently sympathetic to al Qaeda videos. We know some country reported to us awhile back that the older brother was an Islamic radical. We know he left the country for 6 months last year. I am not saying it proves anything (other than big sis dropped the ball), but it raises obvious questions.

 

[CarmelHP]

Not mirandizing him is only an issue if he talks and they want to use what he says to prosecute him or what he says leads to evidence they want to use to prosecute him.

If they have enough other evidence- no big deal.

...and this isn't even considering the exceptions to Miranda.

Please, no actual logic or information, you're getting in the way of a rant orgy.

 

[NathanJefferson]

From everything I've ever seen and heard this is a complete non-starter. It happens a LOT more than you would think. (combative, unconscious, high-as-a-kite, etc, etc,)

Worst case scenario the prosectution has to throw out any statements he makes prior to being read his rights.

 

[jwh20]

I'm trying to imagine how this is great news for all of us.

It's NOT great news! It clearly shows that "rights" are more and more subjective and can be disregarded as long as there is a "good" reason.

They claim they are invoking a "public safety" exception. Ok, so what if YOU are suddenly deemed a public safety problem because you are a suspected gun owner?

As terrible as the ALLEGED criminal acts this young man is SUSPECTED of committing, he's an American citizen and entitled to be treated in accordance with the rights he has under US and MA law.

So regardless of how much everyone "knows" he's guilty, the due process is still DUE.

Earlier this week we saw an all-out assault on the 2nd Amendment by those who say with emotional tears in their eyes, "nobody needs an assault weapon." We saw the POTUS calling the Senate's actions "shameful" and "cowardly" because some there decided that the 2A was MORE important than public opinion.

Yet now some would agree this man doesn't deserve his rights because of what he did.

I'm sorry, that's the "liberal" way where you bend the law to suit your own twisted world-view. As disturbing as this young man's actions have been, I am now HORRIFIED that our government would dispose of his rights so flippantly.

If it can happen to him today, it WILL happen to any of us TOMORROW!

I urge you to write your lawmakers and raise this issue!

 

[cobber]

Miranda is only due process if you use his statements to incriminate him.

If you gather information about other people, then the 5th would not be an impediment to that questioning.

Other subjects cannot raise Joker's 5th A. right by proxy; he's the only person who can do that, and only if he is asked incriminating questions...

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Many people who are arrested are not read Miranda, many more than a majority.

 

[IncendiaryGunner]

If he is guilty, then convicting him should not be difficult.

I see no reason that he should not be tried in court like any other criminal.... This is what we have the court system for....

 

[KG1]

Miranda is only due process if you use his statements to incriminate him.

If you gather information about other people, then the 5th would not be an impediment to that questioning.

Other subjects cannot raise Joker's 5th A. right by proxy; he's the only person who can do that, and only if he is asked incriminating questions...

So if I'm getting this right they sort of gave him immunity from self incrimination by using this tact to be able to question him immediately about other aspects of the case such as if there are others involved or if he has knowledge of any more danger to the general public.

 

[HoughMade]

He will be prosecuted criminally. There's no rational doubt about that.

 

[cobber]

So if I'm getting this right they sort of gave him immunity from self incrimination by using this tact to be able to question him immediately about other aspects of the case such as if there are others involved or if he has knowledge of any more danger to the general public.

No. I wouldn't draw any conclusions about immunity, or where he might be tried.

I am guessing the .gov would rather he had died fighting the police, though.

 

[Denny347]

Well, Miranda is premature since he was almost dead when they took him into custody. USDOJ stated there was a public safety exemption for Miranda ( I am guessing they are talking about questioning about other devices but this is the first I have heard of this exemption) but he WILL be tried in court. This kid is a citizen and became one 9-11-2012. We have criminally tried lots of other domestic terrorists and I see no reason to change that now. That is IF he survives his injuries.

 

[Denny347]

No. I wouldn't draw any conclusions about immunity, or where he might be tried.

I am guessing the .gov would rather he had died fighting the police, though.

FBI HRT acted very deliberately and it was very obvious they wanted him alive.

 

[E'villeGunner]

I'm by no means a know-it-all, (my wife thinks I am). But just guessing it has to do with him being labeled a "terrorist".

And I think he should be sent to GITMO and let them "interrogate" there.

 

[Denny347]

I'm by no means a know-it-all, (my wife thinks I am). But just guessing it has to do with him being labeled a "terrorist".

And I think he should be sent to GITMO and let them "interrogate" there.

Was the trial for Timothy McVey not sufficient? How about his execution? US citizen should always get a trial as outlined in our Constitution. GITMO is no place for a US Citizen. Our supermax prisons are VERY secure.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Unless I missed it in another thread (which admittedly I have not caught up with all of them yet since i last was on), no one has been able to show that it was anything close to a police state. If the presence of LE on the streets is all that is necessary for you to think it's a police state, perhaps we need to re-evaluate the definition of level-headed.

I am still trying to understand how the bad guy was supposed to be caught with all the LEOs put away so nobody could see them.

I think that most level-headed people see the need for extraordinary measures in response to extraordinary events, and I believe that terrorist attacks on international sporting events qualifies for this distinction. The trick is to ensure that a return to normalcy occurs after the event is resolved. In any event, I haven't seen anything so far that is so outrageous that it smacks of a police state. Perhaps I am too level-headed.

Lets see, a government order for people to be confined to their homes until further notice, warrantless searches with no justification beyond being within a certain area (which turned out not to have contained the suspect, not that it would have been any more justified anyway), searching people at random (read searching anyone the police caught out from behind a locked door) which has significant likelihood of morphing into a NYC 'stop and frisk' for some time yet to come, all done as crowds cheer the police driving armored vehicles down the streets as soon as they were *allowed* to come outside. Sounds like a police state to me. Just because we have seen only the trailer and the movie hasn't started yet, that does not imply that it isn't coming.

A return to 'normalcy' (tip of the hat to Warren G. Harding for inventing the word) should not be a subject of discussion. There never should have been a departure from normality so far as the rights of the people including but not limited to proper adherence to the Fourth Amendment (fact notwithstanding that violation thereof has become commonplace) and freedom of movement. One criminal at large does not justify such overreach nor does the rule of law tolerate it, tolerance from traitorous judges notwithstanding.

As for the bomber, as a citizen (fact that he should never have become such notwithstanding) he is entitled to due process. There are no asterisks in the Constitution granting exceptions regarding *terrorists*. I will say that I do not feel any particular sympathy and my defense of his entitlement to due process is for selfish reasons with emphasis on the fact that if he can be denied due process by virtue of being declared a *terrorist* by a nameless, faceless bureaucrat, so can I, and so can you.

I think that most level-headed people see the need for extraordinary measures in response to extraordinary events,

Oh, you are absolutely right. Constitutional rights should be negotiable and malleable as needed on account of circumstances. By the same token, we should not opposed reasonable, common sense gun regulations. After all, no one should be able to gun down dozens of people in seconds.

You have clearly demonstrated that you have absolutely no understanding of a right or the concept of principle. A right, by definition, is not subject to modification, revocation, or conditions, either permanently or temporarily, as opposed to a privilege which is subject to all of the above. The other critical distinction is that a matter of principle applies under all circumstances in all times independent of outside influences. A prime example is that the Second Amendment was intended to keep the balance of power in favor of the people and the 'but they didn't have [insert modern weapon of your choice back then]' argument is complete horses**t. Likewise, the existence of a particularly troubling bogeyman does not magically cancel the rights of the citizens, again, including and especially the Fourth Amendment and freedom of movement. So far as I am concerned, the police can request compliance with conditions that they consider to assist them in apprehending dangerous persons. I will not belittle those who choose to comply provided that they do so completely by choice and not by receiving an overt order or an order packaged to sound like a request (like when parents present their sons with 'please take out the trash' which is really an order with punishment to follow if they don't). General detention and warrantless searches of property and persons are not acceptable. Period. I don't care who is at large.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Was the trial for Timothy McVey not sufficient? How about his execution? US citizen should always get a trial as outlined in our Constitution. GITMO is no place for a US Citizen. Our supermax prisons are VERY secure.