Famous Miranda rights warning could get rewrite

Status
Not open for further replies.

scannerfreak

Moderator
Database Admin
Joined
Jul 3, 2003
Messages
5,185
Location
Indiana
Famous Miranda rights warning could get rewrite - Yahoo! News

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Monday seemed headed toward telling police they must explicitly advise criminal suspects that their lawyer can be present during any interrogation.

The arguments in front of the justices were the latest over how explicit the Miranda warning rights have to be, as justices debated whether the warnings police gave Kevin Dwayne Powell made clear to him that he could have a lawyer present while being interrogated by police.
Why am I not surprised :roll: It's needs to be rewritten if they are going to allow them to use that excuse.
 

KC9NCF

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Messages
224
Chicago Police have been doing this for ages already, so it wouldn't really be a change. It would just be an officially recognized part of protocol instead of a mere formality. I have seen other Departments in the suburbs near Chicago make this a practice as well, depending on who the officers were.
 

scannerfreak

Moderator
Database Admin
Joined
Jul 3, 2003
Messages
5,185
Location
Indiana
And after seeing this they were very smart in doing this to protect their cases. I hope it gets changed just for the fact it can't be an excuse anymore.
 

mancow

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Feb 19, 2003
Messages
5,941
Location
N.E. Kansas
Famous Miranda rights warning could get rewrite - Yahoo! News



Powell signed a Miranda statement that included the statements "You have the right to talk to a lawyer before answering any of our questions. If you cannot afford to hire a lawyer, one will be appointed for you without cost and before any questioning. You have the right to use any of these rights at any time you want during this interview."



The Florida Supreme Court overturned the conviction on grounds the Tampa police didn't adequately convey to Powell that he was allowed to have a lawyer with him during questioning.

You have the right to talk to a lawyer before answering any of our questions

Does it get more clear than that?

Seriously?

At what pont does a society cease to function when things like this are even contemplated, let alone the basis of policy and law?

It makes you wonder if there is some Utopian mindset at work here that removes these judges so far from reality that they really do believe that crime is almost non existent and most every case is the result of over aggressive authorities.
 

KC9NCF

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Messages
224
Yo Mancow!

I'm guessing that this warning is not a universal thing in every department. This guy pointed out a problem, but because he's obviously STUPID and didn't get it, our tax dollars have to pay for this. Literacy workshops are great things, but criminals never seem to attend.
 

KC9NCF

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Messages
224
Riggs to Arjun Rudd and group:

"Einee, Miney, HEY MOE!" Shoots place up and fish tank spills on floor.

OR

There's always the dentist office scene in LW 4 where they're grilling the crooked chinese guy and he just keeps saying "Yamimbe" and he then talks about the four fathers. When Riggs and everyone leave the office, they're all high on happy gas and telling this old chinese crook what they're gonna do to him if he lied to them. Funny as hell!
 

Piston52Heavy

Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2006
Messages
279
Location
Macomb, MI.
Yo Mancow!

I'm guessing that this warning is not a universal thing in every department. This guy pointed out a problem, but because he's obviously STUPID and didn't get it, our tax dollars have to pay for this. Literacy workshops are great things, but criminals never seem to attend.
I keep telling people there are too many retards roaming the planet! Maybe the police should've bought the guy a helmet and then put him on the short bus! Let's just hope this guy doesn't reproduce!
 
Last edited:

KC9NCF

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Messages
224
I keep telling people there are too many retards roaming the planet! Maybe the police should've bought the guy a helmet and then put him on the short bus! Let's just hope this guy doesn't reproduce!
Using best "Church Lady" voice impersonation.....isn't that special?! :)
 

mancow

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Feb 19, 2003
Messages
5,941
Location
N.E. Kansas
Definitely not universal, I have always been told custody + interrogation = Miranda.



Yo Mancow!

I'm guessing that this warning is not a universal thing in every department. This guy pointed out a problem, but because he's obviously STUPID and didn't get it, our tax dollars have to pay for this. Literacy workshops are great things, but criminals never seem to attend.
 

KC9NCF

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Messages
224
Definitely not universal, I have always been told custody + interrogation = Miranda.
If it were me: Custody + Interrogation = Me keeping my damned mouth shut! My only statement would be...I'm not saying a damn word until and unless I have an attorney here. When the attorney gets there, I want to see some ID. Why? Because the Police can get one of their own to come in and impersonate a Public Defender or something. It's been done and gets done still everyday.

My next statement would be: F@$^ what kind of inconvenience it is to you and your case quota! Maybe some work will help y'all lose weight!
 

mancow

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Feb 19, 2003
Messages
5,941
Location
N.E. Kansas
Good idea on the keeping your mouth shut. That is definitely the best thing to do if ever in a "situation".

As for the public defender thing.....that wouldn't fly. That statement would suppressed immediately.
 

KC9NCF

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Messages
224
Good idea on the keeping your mouth shut. That is definitely the best thing to do if ever in a "situation".

As for the public defender thing.....that wouldn't fly. That statement would suppressed immediately.
Not in Illinois! The police use this technique constantly here. A good case from my own district as an example would be: gang banger goes out and shoots someone. Police arrest said gang banger shortly after the incident, and he doesn't have the gun on him. Banger lawyers up and sits in the interrogation room for about an hour and a half before a det. from Area 5 walks in and says, "hey, I'm so and so from the Cook County Public Defender's Office and I'm here to represent you on these shooting allegations." Stupid kid never asks the supposed attorney for an ID. He talks to this Detective playing attorney and the Detective then identifies himself after he gets all the proof he needs from the kid and the kid gets convicted.

U.S. Supreme Court rulings say that the police may use deception in their interrogation techniques but they may not use force.
 

kandrey89

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Messages
317
Location
San Ramon, CA USA
That's why the the best way to protect yourself is to tell the whole truth and everything about the truth to everyone, and only tell the real truth to yourself, or otherwise if I tell you I'm going to have to kill you, but thats a different department ;)
LOL

Which is why this deception trick seems like a good idea for the degenerate scumbags who sell drugs, attack people and the kind...
 

JoeyC

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
3,402
Location
San Diego, CA
Not in Illinois! The police use this technique constantly here. A good case from my own district as an example would be: gang banger goes out and shoots someone. Police arrest said gang banger shortly after the incident, and he doesn't have the gun on him. Banger lawyers up and sits in the interrogation room for about an hour and a half before a det. from Area 5 walks in and says, "hey, I'm so and so from the Cook County Public Defender's Office and I'm here to represent you on these shooting allegations." Stupid kid never asks the supposed attorney for an ID. He talks to this Detective playing attorney and the Detective then identifies himself after he gets all the proof he needs from the kid and the kid gets convicted.

U.S. Supreme Court rulings say that the police may use deception in their interrogation techniques but they may not use force.
Wow, you are an expert on so many things. Last I checked, Illinois is just another state in the USA. While they most certainly do use clever interrogation techniques, I would imagine that if the police were routinely tricking defendants by pretending to be their attorneys, the DA would soon have no cases to prosecute as they would all be thrown out of court. More likely, that is your incorrect assessment that the detective was "playing attorney" when in fact all he was on was a mission to get a confession. Do you have a real life example of this cop playing attorney scheme you speak of??
 

KC9NCF

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Messages
224
The above IS from a real case. I'll reference this by saying it came to me first hand from an Officer in a NW Side Police District which also serves as Area 5 Detective HQ. Because I don't know where this case is at this time, I can't say anymore. I CAN say that the Officer it came to me from was one of the arresting Officers.

Again, I would check the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on police deception in interrogations, which expressly allows the technique I spoke of. I never said I was an expert, I just put out here the things I've been taught and the first hand knowledge passed on to me from credible sources who work in their fields. I can tell you furthermore that I have been in the felony court rooms to observe this go both ways, which goes to say I have seen it backfire. It all depends on which judge the officer and the ASA get.

Judges will rule in various ways on something that is legally sound, but may happen to be something that was A.) Misapplied or (B) Used correctly, but in conflict with defendants rights even if applied correctly.

The law CAN be in conflict with itself because we DO have two sets of laws which are, at times, at odds. State Law and Federal Law. The constitution says you have the right against self-incrimination, but that right can be taken in certain instances. It can even be circumvented when it can't expressly be taken. This goes for all of our rights because in the end, they are just temporary privileges since rights are something that can't be taken or circumvented. If a "right" can be taken, limited, or circumvented, then it ain't a right! Add to this that the State has the benefit even in criminal cases to enjoy separation of State and Federal powers.

Judges do what they do and only the legal process can deal with that in the form of appeals, etc.

A good real life case would be a case I was there to watch which involved a prostitute who was well known by the police. The arresting officer was on the Tact team and on duty when he observed her on the street doing what she normally does. He approached her, made her an offer and when she bit, he identified himself as the Police. She was arrested, taken to the district for processing, and in court the judge said that police officers in plainclothes constitute "entrapment" and he ruled that there was no probable cause. The defendant was dismissed.

The State did not opt for an appeal. This woman was charged with a felony, but walked scott free.

On the other hand, this same judge had other cases in which plainclothes officers observed a criminal act of a Felony type, made an arrest and found probable cause. Go figure.
 
Last edited:

KC9NCF

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Messages
224
No, it isn't hearsay. Read again: the officer that it came to me from was one of the arresting officers. Hence, he took part in the interrogation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top