Skip to comments.ACLU Eyes Boston Bombing Suspect's Miranda Rights
Posted on 04/20/2013 2:04:05 PM PDT by Steelfish
ACLU Eyes Boston Bombing Suspect's Miranda Rights
BOSTON April 20, 2013
The American Civil Liberties Union says it's concerned the surviving Boston Marathon bombing suspect will be questioned by investigators without being read his Miranda rights.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (joh-KAHR' tsahr-NY'-ehv) remained hospitalized Saturday after being wounded in a firefight with police Friday. His brother was killed earlier.
U.S. officials say a special interrogation team for high-value suspects will question Tsarnaev without reading him his Miranda rights, invoking a rare public safety exception triggered by the need to protect the public from immediate danger.
ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero says the exception applies only when there's a continued threat to public safety and is "not an open-ended exception" to the Miranda rule.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
We’re all going to wish this kid had his arse blown off yesterday by the time the media finishes with the case.
Commies supporting muzzies. Brothers of the faith, all murdering thugs.
I agree. Part of me really wish they would have just killed him. I guess if we get some information out of him, it might be worth it, but nothing is known. It certainly could have been just the two of them.
You have to let him go if he wasn’t read his Miranda rights and the state must pay handsomely if the one who was killed wasn’t Mirandized before he was shot.
It’s only fair, ya know?
How does MA deal with 19year old criminals? Is it the same as those over 21?
I am not buying that he hasn’t already been read/advised of his Miranda rights.
Article on Miranda rights...
Exerpt from above article;
Law enforcement has successfully captured Dzhokar Tsarnaev, and DOJ has announced that Tsarnaev is being interrogated without first being read his Miranda rights because the DOJ thinks that the public safety exception to Miranda applies. Back in 2010, I blogged a lot about Miranda in this setting. Here are a few reminders about the law here:
1) A lot of people assume that the police are required to read a suspect his Miranda rights upon arrest. That is, they assume that one of a persons rights is the right to be read their rights. It often happens that way on Law & Order, but thats not what the law actually requires. The police arent required to follow Miranda. Miranda is a set of rules the government can chose to follow if they want to admit a persons statements in a criminal case in court, not a set of rules they have to follow in every case. Under Chavez v. Martinez, 538 U.S. 760 (2003), it is lawful for the police to not read a suspect his Miranda rights, interrogate him, and then obtain a statement. Chavez holds that a persons Miranda rights are violated only if the statement is admitted in court, even if the statement is obtained in violation of Miranda. See id. at 772-73. Further, the prosecution is even allowed to admit any physical evidence discovered as a fruit of the statement obtained in violation of Miranda only the actual statement can be excluded. See United States v. Patane, 542 U.S. 630 (2004). So, contrary to what a lot of people think, it is legal for the government to even intentionally violate Miranda so long as they dont try to seek admission of the suspects statements in court.
A lot of hubbub on this topic. All I care to add is that I’ve always thought the SC’s ruling that an arrested person has to be read their “Miranda rights” is one of the stupidest, most dingbat things they ever did. Coincided with that whole late-60s era of insanity that has led to America becoming such a pathetic, decaying circus of a country that it now is.
Americans eye ACLU as subversive.
When the problem becomes the problem of the ones who created the problem the problem is solved.
I foresee tort reform in America’s future.
Is this a case of “nudge, nudge, wink, wink, we’ll question you without advising you of your Miranda rights so you can say something (perhaps worthless) and have all kinds of facts thrown out in court?
Slam the sucker in jail. Then advise other prisoners of their right to know that this little weasel and his brother killed several people, including a little boy, and blew the limbs off a dozen people. Seemingly without being concerned about it.
read him his Miranda rights, then hang him.
These Islamic barbarians committed a treasonous act of war against the United States during time of war. They, er, he should be tried by a military court and hanged as a traitor.
Describing the ACLU as subversive is FAR to kind.
Just so everybody knows, real life is not Law & Order. Unless he gave a post-custody/pre-Miranda confession, and that’s the only evidence we have, it’s not going to matter a whole lot.
It certainly COULD be just those two. But, if there are more like him that he knows something about, does anyone really think this kid is going to talk about it? How are they going to get him to talk w/o violating his “rights”. He’s a US citizen.
I really think we should extend trial by jury to enemies on the battlefield before our troops can pull a trigger. And a grand jury before they can aim.
And mirandized before they can go on patrol.