Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)I triple dog dare you to read this. TRIPLE DOG I SAY! Abuse of power..... [View all]
What many do not realize is that these "exceptions" will be abused. And not always used for the purposes the government sells to the public, who tend to blindly believe it.
here are excrpts, but worth reading the whole article at:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/04/dzhokhar_tsarnaev_and_miranda_rights_the_public_safety_exception_and_terrorism.html
Why Should I Care That No Ones Reading Dzhokhar Tsarnaev His Miranda Rights?
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will not hear his Miranda rights before the FBI questions him Friday night. He will have to remember on his own that he has a right to a lawyer, and that anything he says can be used against him in court, because the government wont tell him. This is an extension of a rule the Justice Department wrote for the FBIwithout the oversight of any courtcalled the public safety exception.
...........
Holder started talking about a bill to broadly expand the exception to Miranda a few months later. Nothing came of that idea, but in October of 2010, Holders Justice Department took it upon itself to widen the exception to Miranda beyond the Supreme Courts 1984 ruling. Agents should ask any and all questions that are reasonably prompted by an immediate concern for the safety of the public or the arresting agents, stated a DoJ memo to the FBI that wasnt disclosed at the time. Again, fine and good. But the memo continues, there may be exceptional cases in which, although all relevant public safety questions have been asked, agents nonetheless conclude that continued unwarned interrogation is necessary to collect valuable and timely intelligence not related to any immediate threat, and that the government's interest in obtaining this intelligence outweighs the disadvantages of proceeding with unwarned interrogation.
..........
And so the FBI will surely ask 19-year-old Tsarnaev anything it sees fit. Not just what law enforcement needs to know to prevent a terrorist threat and keep the public safe but anything else it deemed related to valuable and timely intelligence. Couldnt that be just about anything about Tsarnaevs life, or his family, given that his alleged accomplice was his older brother (killed in a shootout with police)? There wont be a public uproar. Whatever the FBI learns will be secret: We wont know how far the interrogation went. And besides, no one is crying over the rights of the young man who is accused of killing innocent people, helping his brother set off bombs that were loaded to maim, and terrorizing Boston Thursday night and Friday. But the next time you read about an abusive interrogation, or a wrongful conviction that resulted from a false confession, think about why we have Miranda in the first place. Its to stop law enforcement authorities from committing abuses. Because when they can make their own rules, sometime, somewhere, they inevitably will.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/04/dzhokhar_tsarnaev_and_miranda_rights_the_public_safety_exception_and_terrorism.html
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
25 replies, 2767 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (5)
ReplyReply to this post
25 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I triple dog dare you to read this. TRIPLE DOG I SAY! Abuse of power..... [View all]
Logical
Apr 2013
OP
Yes, I am surprised the DU is so OK with this. I guess emotions rule this week. n-t
Logical
Apr 2013
#2
I am not worried about this guy honestly. But the law worries me in not so simple cases. n-t
Logical
Apr 2013
#17
He IS being treated the same. The 48 hour exemption is well-established case law.
randome
Apr 2013
#18