Four questions about the Miranda Law change.

[The Backlash Cometh]

First, the police still have to Mirandize the individual before asking questions, right?

Second, it's only AFTER he's been Mirandized that he has to say that he wants to invoke his right to remain silent, correct?

Third, doesn't that mean that the police have to change the Miranda statement to include this new requirement?

and, fourth... how does this affect people who don't understand English? Like, let's say a French tourist?

http://www.beaumontenterprise.com/news/local/Supreme_Court_changes_Miranda_law.html

[flyarm]

1. 1. why does it need to be changed at all? 2. it has worked effectively for many many years!

3. we have a dem pres and congress why it is being changed at all?????????

It only gives the governmental types more power over we the people!

4. why when a republican was pres and we had a republican congress did dems fight so hard against these changes and now we are supposed to gladly accept these changes and dems now say..well the changes aren;t so bad............

I will never accept these changes to our rights...be damned who is running our government..we the people are the government and every time we let our elected officials change our rights we are fucked!

[Echo In Light]

7. "It only gives the governmental types more power over we the people!"

And that's the only reason those fucks would bother making such a 'change' at all.

[John Q. Citizen]

13. There is no Miranda law. There was a ruling in a Supreme Court case.

There is now a new ruling in another Supreme Court Case.

I disagree with the new ruling, but members of the Supreme Court are nort elected officials.

[Toots]

2. Does "You have the RIGHT to remain silent" but only if you speak up about it

even make any sense.. You can be silent but only if you are not silent and tell us you want to be silent..:shrug:

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. I think it means we all have to learn how to sign.

[TorchTheWitch]

3. nothing has changed

The suspect didn't remain silent. The right to remain silent means not answering any questions... "You have the right to remain silent, anything you do say can and will be used against you." A suspect that answers some questions but not all of them hasn't invoked their right to remain silent. Remaining silent without saying you aren't going to be answering any questions doesn't stop an interrogation and legally may not stop it anyway (as far as I know, the only way to stop the interrogation is to request an attorney). In order to invoke your right to remain silent, you have to REMAIN SILENT. If you DO answer some questions, you haven't invoked your right to remain silent. Nothing has changed in the law here.

The purpose of Miranda is to inform people of what their rights are. Once they have been informed of their right to remain silent, and they DON'T remain silent by answering some of the questions, that's their problem... when told of their right to remain silent they are also told "anything you do say can and will be used against you."

Translators are used for non-English speakers, same as always.

[The Backlash Cometh]

5. Well, then,

Shouldn't one of the rights that the police should tell the people is that only by invoking your right to an attorney can you stop this interrogation?

(And when you do, they will all assume you're guilty.)

[TorchTheWitch]

6. They're informed of their right to an attorney

If they don't request one, that's their problem. Miranda rights have never included a right that they be told that if they request an attorney the interrogation must stop... Miranda rights were never intended to inform every suspect of police and legal procedures, they were intended merely to inform a suspect of what their rights are, and they do just that.

Requesting an attorney is never legally looked upon as any admission of guilt, and police will normally think anyone they arrest is guilty anyway, so who gives a shit what they think when you ask for an attorney? The smart person when informed of their rights invokes them... remaining silent by not answering ANY questions and requesting an attorney immediately to avoid any further questions.

If this new ruling by the court actually stops an interrogation by the suspect immediately saying they are invoking their right to remain silent, that's certainly an improvement for suspects since they won't be asked a bunch of questions while the police try to figure out if they're not going to answer any of them or they're deaf or don't speak English or whatever. Interrogations are intentionally intimidating even before the first question is asked on purpose to try to get the suspect to talk... if this ruling can stop an interrogation as soon as the suspect says they aren't going to answer any questions without having to request an attorney, that's a big improvement for suspects.

[The Backlash Cometh]

11. TTW

I've seen cop shows (where the cops are the good guys) comment that the guy had something to hide because he asked for a lawyer.

[msanthrope]

19. That's a different right....

Invoking the 6th amendment right to counsel does not invoke Miranda, and invoking Miranda does not invoke the 6th.

Here, I differ from Torch the Witch only because you have a suspect who refused to sign a Miranda waiver, and was then continuously questioned for 3 more hours. This is not disputed. Doesn't refusal--repeated refusal--to sign the waiver invoke Miranda? That's how it's worked for a very long time. why change that and put an added burden on the suspect?

[zipplewrath]

9. Oh, it's changed

There is more than just saying the standard statement. You have to ensure that the person understood it, and is capable of understanding it. What is NOT in the statement is that you can stop the questioning by saying two things. Either, I want to speak to my attorney, or by saying that you want to invoke your right to remain silent. What is really insidious about this ruling is that you can apparently "surrender" that right by answering a question like "do you want a glass of water".

[The Backlash Cometh]

12. They really opened up a can of worms with this one.

Because you know the police will abuse the gray areas.

[zipplewrath]

16. Funny part is what one critic said yesterday

This actually strengthens the law for those "in the know". It suggests that the smart person merely has to express a desire to remain silent, and the burden then falls upon the police to somehow get that changed. It will almost certainly mean getting the person some representation. Yeah, the clueless on the street won't understand, but the repeat offender who has spent time with the jail house lawyer just got given new instructions.

[reggie the dog]

10. never answer questions

i dont care if the coppers say they need help busting a murderer or rapist, the fuckers will try to pin the crime on anyone so first I would lie and say i saw nothing, then i would refuse to talk and I would ask to either 1 be let go or 2 to be charged with a crime so that my lawyer knows what to fight against

[msongs]

14. the gestapo says you wave your rights if answer "yes" to "do you have to go to the bathroom?" nt

[John Q. Citizen]

15. According to legal experts on both the right and the left, this is a change. Are you legal expert ?

[reggie the dog]

8. i advise people here in france heading to the usa

to be wary of usa cops, and to tell them not to take their papers out of their pocket too quickly etc. and i tell them that they should avoid the cops at all costs.

[ghurley]

17. What I have learned...

from reading this article is that as soon as handcuffs are put on, you have to say "I understand my rights, I would like a lawyer, and I have nothing more to say". Once that is said, it sounds like you are protected from any further questioning.

I really wish there were more public service announcements or something that let people know what their rights are. I still don't know what my rights are when I am being questioned by the police without being arrested. Can anyone shed some light on this?

[merh]

18. You have the right to invoke the 5th amendment (remain silent)

at any time, before or after the Miranda warning. Even during questioning, if you are answering the questions and then decide you want to stop answering and exercise your right to remain silent.

The Miranda warning is a directive handed down by SCOTUS. They recommended that LEO let the accused know his/her rights.

There has always been a burden on the person to exercise their rights. Miranda was decided based on the premise that not every citizen is familiar with their rights and/or what they can or cannot do if being questioned and/or detained.

If a tourist is not explained their rights in a language they can understand, one would assume any confession could not be understood either.