nekom: Any lawyer worth his salt will instruct his client in no uncertain terms to make no statement to the police under any circumstances. - Justice Robert Jackson
elysive: nekom: Any lawyer worth his salt will instruct his client in no uncertain terms to make no statement to the police under any circumstances. - Justice Robert JacksonCould refusal to answer questions during an investigation be considered obstruction of justice? And with this new ruling could total silence without a plea of the fifth be used as evidence of total guilt of something./ruling just seems soooo wrong
mattharvest: 3. Your third fear, of ignorance of Miranda (which isn't even relevant to this case since no one was ever in custody), has been routinely dismissed by the Court for the last forty years or more. In a 74 decision (cited in this opinion, in fact), the Court remarked that anyone who watched TV (in 1974 even!) knew their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
Lost Thought 00: But how should I be outraged by this?
HoustonNick: How hard is it to say "I'm invoking my 5th Amendment right to remain silent" - BOOM - done deal
Teiritzamna: I hate Miranda (or 4th amendment) threads because they make me so unhappy. For example, now i am remembering Rhode Island v. Innis, which is the "true story" you referenced and I find myself wanting to punch something.
HAMMERTOE: If you catch a police investigator in a lie, does that constitute breach of trust, thereby nullifying any obligation on honesty on your part?
HazMatt: It seems to me now that guilty or innocent the best strategy is to not talk to law enforcement at all, or only with a lawyer. It seems too complex for a lay person to handle how their statements or silence could be interpreted and used against them.Am I wrong? Are their situations where it is advantageous to talk to the police? Beyond some vague "civic duty"?
meanmutton: HAMMERTOE: If you catch a police investigator in a lie, does that constitute breach of trust, thereby nullifying any obligation on honesty on your part?shiat, dude, why the fark are you playing THAT game? The police are highly trained, highly skilled. If you talk with them, they'll run you. It doesn't matter how smart you are, what sort of law degree you have, whatever. If you talk, they'll run you. Of course, you have the trump card:"I want a lawyer" + STFU
Dear Jerk: I only read this mess once, but was Miranda actually ammended?
mattharvest: Ignorance of the law is no excuse, despite the whingey tone of this Above the Law article.
elysive: My problems with the ruling include: 1) if a person can be convicted based on silent inference of physical evidence when physical forensicevidence could instead be obtained (if they couldnt actually match the weapon, why not?), 2) if this ruling is used to ask random people point blank if they commited crimes and then to prosecute them on the basis of their silence alone...who needs a full investigation...and 3) if the ruling is abused and used for fishing expeditions like asking about tax compliance while interviewing someone about their neighbor's suspicious behavior. I've already objected that a lot of people are so ignorant they dont know about the Fifth Amendment.
nekom: mattharvest:The Court's conclusion, then, is that If he wasn't in custody, then he needed to invoke the Fifth to be protected by it. If you cannot dispute the previous two points, how can you dispute their conclusion?I personally believe that declining to answer a question and answering no further questions should be taken as invoking the 5th. Just my personal opinion.
vernonFL: "looked down at the floor, shuffled his feet, bit his bottom lip, clenched his hands in his lap, [and] began to tighten up."If that is true, (and the cops could have just made that up) - the guy's body language spoke for him.Police are trained to spot those "tells" in your behavior.
nekom: mattharvest: elysive: The guy in this case is an idiot...I suppose that if this ruling only affects idiots we should count ourselves lucky.The smartest criminals don't get caught, I suppose.The smartest criminals wear a suit and tie to work every day.
elysive: nekom: Any lawyer worth his salt will instruct his client in no uncertain terms to make no statement to the police under any circumstances. - Justice Robert JacksonCould refusal to answer questions during an investigation be considered obstruction of justice?
nekom: The ruling is BS,
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Aug 20 2017 22:00:05
Runtime: 0.308 sec (308 ms)