Active Users:929 Time:12/07/2026 09:35:21 PM
spare me the pontificating damookster Send a noteboard - 02/06/2010 01:50:27 AM
rather it means you haven't stated either way if you will be exercising your Miranda rights. Hence, they can continue questioning. Until such time as you do definitively exercise said rights.


The implication of silence is now a waiver for the right to remain silent. Before they could not continue questioning you for hours if you remained silent because the constructive implication is you were electing to use your right to remain silent. Now, that legal construction is gone and the cops WILL abuse it. In addition, if you do not know the amount of pressure that can be brought to bear on an innocent person during an interrogation I suggest you do a quick Google search on the innocence project and false confessions.



Hours? Really? What exactly does that mean? Could they question you for two hours, but not three? One but not two? Four but not five? Where was the cut-off, at 31 minutes past the hour? Did it differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction or was there a federally mandated standard? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? If anything this is an improvement from the vague and ambiguous "hours" to a definitive stopping point.

And please don't preach to me about police tactics. I grew up in an era when police could search you because you had long hair and were wearing bell-bottoms, and when many such persons "fell down the stairs" when brought to the police station. So thanks but I don't need the education.
Mook

*MySmiley*



"Bustin' makes me feel good!"

Ghostbusters, by Ray Parker Jr.
Reply to message
SCOTUS Update: Right to remain silent? Suspect better speak up - - 01/06/2010 07:53:14 PM 1270 Views
What I don't like about this decision... - 01/06/2010 08:21:02 PM 838 Views
I think the only potential issue is if the person didn't understand the Miranda warning. - 01/06/2010 10:37:42 PM 770 Views
Damn you common sense!!! *NM* - 02/06/2010 02:56:17 AM 329 Views
that is an odd way of looking at it - 01/06/2010 11:58:12 PM 793 Views
I'm more referring to the almost "magic words" that Kennedy introduces here. - 02/06/2010 12:18:07 AM 801 Views
So we should not allow police to question people at all? - 02/06/2010 12:31:27 AM 728 Views
You won't hear me complain if the Miranda rights are scaled back a bit. - 02/06/2010 12:40:23 AM 712 Views
The goal is not to keep guilty people from confessing - 02/06/2010 01:48:48 AM 746 Views
The way I see it... - 02/06/2010 03:06:01 AM 875 Views
Seems reasonable to me - 01/06/2010 09:44:30 PM 866 Views
This seems reasonable to me. - 01/06/2010 09:47:34 PM 815 Views
Hey deaf people who can't speak... pound sand. - 01/06/2010 09:55:41 PM 870 Views
well the deaf can simply close their eyes and end the interview - 02/06/2010 12:26:31 AM 752 Views
Re: well the deaf can simply close their eyes and end the interview - 02/06/2010 03:57:35 AM 769 Views
you are often questioned by the police? What are you doing to make that happen? - 02/06/2010 03:35:47 PM 804 Views
I travel internationally - 02/06/2010 08:40:38 PM 772 Views
This decision is a setback for us all. - 01/06/2010 10:10:51 PM 887 Views
No it isn't. - 01/06/2010 10:42:06 PM 798 Views
Re: No it isn't. - 01/06/2010 11:26:07 PM 809 Views
bah - 02/06/2010 12:11:46 AM 751 Views
Teach people to say "I'm not saying anything until my lawyer gets here." Period. *NM* - 02/06/2010 12:38:24 AM 323 Views
Close, but not cigar. - 02/06/2010 01:30:19 AM 813 Views
if they catch more bad guys is that a bad thing? *NM* - 02/06/2010 01:50:12 AM 333 Views
Would you be okay with the prohibition of firearms if it lowered the crime rate? - 02/06/2010 02:18:26 AM 774 Views
I think you have to have reasonable balance - 02/06/2010 05:48:31 PM 831 Views
You are at the intersection of bull and shit. - 02/06/2010 04:00:32 PM 793 Views
Re: You are at the intersection of bull and shit. - 02/06/2010 10:18:36 PM 791 Views
Hey douchebag, you're still wrong. - 02/06/2010 10:34:48 PM 769 Views
Any particular reason you started the name calling? - 02/06/2010 10:58:47 PM 708 Views
At what point did that happen? - 02/06/2010 01:26:13 AM 733 Views
This is what I alluded to in my response. - 02/06/2010 01:44:14 AM 827 Views
Re: At what point did that happen? - 02/06/2010 01:48:52 AM 856 Views
I am confused - 01/06/2010 11:09:14 PM 782 Views
Re: I am confused - 01/06/2010 11:15:07 PM 719 Views
ummm, no... - 02/06/2010 12:13:59 AM 807 Views
Re: ummm, no... - 02/06/2010 01:38:54 AM 756 Views
spare me the pontificating - 02/06/2010 01:50:27 AM 850 Views
Re: spare me the pontificating - 02/06/2010 02:01:27 AM 737 Views
you never wave your right to remain silent forever - 02/06/2010 01:53:07 AM 721 Views
It's perhaps odd that we're on opposite sides of this. - 02/06/2010 01:59:46 AM 758 Views
Nothing has changed - 02/06/2010 01:56:08 AM 755 Views
As far as I can tell, this changes nothing and simply maintains the status quo. - 01/06/2010 11:27:36 PM 772 Views
An interesting way of looking at it at the end. - 02/06/2010 02:05:34 AM 833 Views
For those who don't understand the techniques of police interrogation let me make this clear. - 02/06/2010 01:57:51 AM 844 Views
Good advice - 02/06/2010 04:00:45 AM 706 Views
I always love in the TV shows when... - 02/06/2010 04:16:35 AM 813 Views
Re: I always love in the TV shows when... - 02/06/2010 04:36:34 AM 897 Views

Reply to Message