The cynical ones here might think there was an agenda behind this action…
Dirty Harry nails it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=_Y-_-6sxXRI
This kid is a monster of the worst kind, let’s hope that he never sees the light of day again.
He’s a fucking punk-ass, dip-shit kid that thought his big brother knew everything…nothing more.
So he’s not being issued a lawyer free of charge?
“We got him,” Boston Mayor Tom Menino tweeted immediately after Tsarnaev was arrested. “I have never loved this city & its people more than I do today. Nothing can defeat the heart of this city … nothing.”
American citizen. No reason to let the Constitution get in their way.
“I’LL DEFEND THE GUILTY SONOFABITCH!” While I’m doing that, can someone get a good rope, please?
Religion of Peace. Yeah.
Eventually he will.
Terrorism declaration allows a little more leeway when first capturing him. Some may be unusable in court, but I am willing to bet they have enough evidence to not worry about his initial statements being admissible.
Beat me to it:
Miranda Laws Have Flexibility - WSJ.com
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323809304578433590768913574.html
So, what is the practical effect of this? They can’t compel him to talk. Basically, it would invalidate anything he says as evidence? Nothing more? Or is there some other effect?
The military has a system: FIND-FIX-FINISH-EXPLOIT-ANALYZE-DISSEMINATE.
Not reading him his Miranda warning lets an interrogator ask him questions to see if he’s working as part of a net. That may or may not be used in his trial, but to exploit information to pursue anyone who helped and assisted.
How does not reading him his Miranda warning allow an interrogator to ask him questions to see if he’s working as part of a net? Why can’t they ask that anyway?
And the Miranda Warning does not create the rights. It is just an
and reminder of those rights, given to the suspect. The rights exist anyway.
I am still confused about this.
–
As soon as he’s Mirandized he can shut his trap, period (5th Amendment protection).
You can’t exploit shit if he’s not running his yap.
He can anyway. They cannot compel him to talk with or without Miranda.
Not reading him his miranda rights allows the suspect to answer questions without fear of those answers being used against him at trial because they’d be inadmissible in court. So he can give up more to help end the immediate threat, which is more important to investigators than prosecuting this one individual, who probably already has a lot of evidence against him. The interrogator can ask whatever questions he wants whenever he wants, before or after miranda rights are read to the suspect.
F3EAD
I’ll probably be in minority here but I’ll say this, I’m all for having this POS waterboarded, his finger nails pulled out etc if does not cooperate with the investigation. BUT, we made him a U.S. citizen along with corresponding constitutional rights. So I’m uncomfortable over how this process of POTUS declaring him an enemy combatant works. WH admin is already on record in months past saying they will not be enforcing the indefinite detetion of US citizens so I don’t foresee them pursuing the whole enemy combatant/military tribunal thing. But its an option for them.
The system needs a overhaul IMO.
Perhaps.
Or, if given the opportunity, would jump at the chance to deliver a brief case dirty bomb - or worse.
He should never be let free, under any circumstances. IMO, it would have been better if he had met the same fate as his brother
The “Miranda rights” are not rights that suddenly appear when they’re read to you.
It is a warning.
“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you do or say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford one, one will be appointed for you by the court.” (Or whatever it is that they’re saying these days.)
The rights mentioned in the Miranda warning are rights that you already have and enjoy. Stating them doesn’t make them suddenly appear out of thin air. The reason for stating them is to ensure that you know what your rights are prior to interrogation.
And the GOP proves once again that they are no friend of civil rights. I wish I could say I was shocked. But for some reason, I’m not.
Why is it that some people insist on calling criminals ‘enemy combatants’?
The same party that’s there to “protect” your 2nd amendment rights is also the same party that wants to throw away people’s 5th and 8th amendment rights…
Seems legit…
No kidding…
Do you mean Republicans? I didn’t think they were currently in office.