3 ms·
This court has taken a very interesting stance. This ruling, plus some earlier rulings regarding the 4th amendment has made it clear, that one has to understand
by relaunched 13y ago
This court has taken a very interesting stance. This ruling, plus some earlier rulings regarding the 4th amendment has made it clear, that one has to understand, intimately, the nuances of ones' rights and act accordingly, in order for those rights to apply. Otherwise, they have agreed to waive those rights.
- dietrichepp 13y agoThe same thing already applies in the courtroom (ignoring the hyperbolic word choice of "intimately" and "nuances"). When you take the stand in court, you have to explicitly invoke your fifth amendment right. Nobody is required to tell you your rights. The article explains how Miranda rights were already special. The requirement for the police to explain your rights was to mitigate the fact that custodial interrogation is inherently coercive (am I free to go? no.) and there is no judge present to interpret the law.
- aqme28 13y agoIn the courtroom you have legal counsel, and if your lawyer doesn't help you to the best of their abilities they can be disbarred.
- dietrichepp 13y agoYou won't necessarily have legal counsel if you're a witness.