3 ms·

Serious question... Have we verified that the reason he hasn't been mirandized yet is anything other than the fact that he's in serious condition and may not ye

by brm 13y ago

Serious question... Have we verified that the reason he hasn't been mirandized yet is anything other than the fact that he's in serious condition and may not yet be able to affirm that he is aware of his rights?

InclinedPlane 13y ago
We haven't even verified that he hasn't been mirandized yet. So, no.
- Steko 13y ago
  http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/doj-official-no-miranda-rights-for-boston-bombing?ref=fpb http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/doj-official-no-... A DOJ official explains why Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzokhar Tsarnaev has not been read his Miranda rights. "The suspect is en route to the hospital for immediate treatment," the official tells TPM's Sahil Kapur. "But we plan to invoke the public safety exception to Miranda in order to question the suspect extensively about other potential explosive devices or accomplices and to gain critical intelligence." The public safety exception allows law enforcement officials to question suspects briefly in a legally admissable way prior to providing Miranda rights in cases of terrorism or when the public might face imminent threat.
  - ruswick 13y ago
    I'm fairly sure that the various agencies and investigative apparatuses have generally come to the consensus that there is no remaining threat, and have explicitly said as much. How can they invoke this Exception when they have stated (and, now as it has become obvious) that there is not a threat? It just seems that invoking the Exception is tantamount to a post facto repudiation of their previous statements, and would require some sort of justification for a reemergence of a threat other than some assertion that conflicts what the entire rest of the world has agreed upon (something which they don't seem to have). They're trying to have their cake and eat it, and it doesn't seem as though it will go over well in court. I'm not versed in the law at all, but this seems intuitively sketchy and lacking in justification. Am I missing something?
    - notimetorelax 13y ago
      What amazes me is how quickly law enforcement starts using various loopholes. It doesn't seem to be necessary here and reading Miranda rights takes less then 30 seconds, still they're not doing it. To think of another example several years ago it was a common knowledge that tasers could be used only when there is threat to others now it is standard practice to taser anyone who doesn't follow police orders.
      - vacri 13y ago
        The Miranda Warning reminds people that they don't have to say anything and that there's no real benefit to doing so anyway. If you want maximum information out of someone, then it runs counter to that, so you would prefer not to say it if possible. There's a great two-part youtube video on the benefits of the 5th Amendment, the second part is with a 30-year veteran police officer who talks about strategies around the Miranda warning [1] Here in Australia, things are a little different - not talking to the police can be held against you in a court of law, as you've hindered them in their duties. I'm not sure of the details, just that the local law advice sites say "It's not like in the US on TV". [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik

by brm 13y ago

InclinedPlane 13y ago

We haven't even verified that he hasn't been mirandized yet. So, no.

Steko 13y ago
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/doj-official-no-miranda-rights-for-boston-bombing?ref=fpb http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/doj-official-no-... A DOJ official explains why Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzokhar Tsarnaev has not been read his Miranda rights. "The suspect is en route to the hospital for immediate treatment," the official tells TPM's Sahil Kapur. "But we plan to invoke the public safety exception to Miranda in order to question the suspect extensively about other potential explosive devices or accomplices and to gain critical intelligence." The public safety exception allows law enforcement officials to question suspects briefly in a legally admissable way prior to providing Miranda rights in cases of terrorism or when the public might face imminent threat.
- ruswick 13y ago
  I'm fairly sure that the various agencies and investigative apparatuses have generally come to the consensus that there is no remaining threat, and have explicitly said as much. How can they invoke this Exception when they have stated (and, now as it has become obvious) that there is not a threat? It just seems that invoking the Exception is tantamount to a post facto repudiation of their previous statements, and would require some sort of justification for a reemergence of a threat other than some assertion that conflicts what the entire rest of the world has agreed upon (something which they don't seem to have). They're trying to have their cake and eat it, and it doesn't seem as though it will go over well in court. I'm not versed in the law at all, but this seems intuitively sketchy and lacking in justification. Am I missing something?
  - notimetorelax 13y ago
    What amazes me is how quickly law enforcement starts using various loopholes. It doesn't seem to be necessary here and reading Miranda rights takes less then 30 seconds, still they're not doing it. To think of another example several years ago it was a common knowledge that tasers could be used only when there is threat to others now it is standard practice to taser anyone who doesn't follow police orders.
    - vacri 13y ago
      The Miranda Warning reminds people that they don't have to say anything and that there's no real benefit to doing so anyway. If you want maximum information out of someone, then it runs counter to that, so you would prefer not to say it if possible. There's a great two-part youtube video on the benefits of the 5th Amendment, the second part is with a 30-year veteran police officer who talks about strategies around the Miranda warning [1] Here in Australia, things are a little different - not talking to the police can be held against you in a court of law, as you've hindered them in their duties. I'm not sure of the details, just that the local law advice sites say "It's not like in the US on TV". [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik