Supreme Court Issues Ruling, Gutting Miranda Rights And Threatening The Fifth Amendment

The Gateway Pundit ^ | June 23, 2022 | Michael Robinson

[Macho MAGA Man]

Bottom line, never talk to law enforcement without a lawyer present.

[Harpotoo]

Exactly!

[tiki]

Exactly.

[Boogieman]

From what I’ve read from other sources, the case doesn’t change anything about what is admissible in court. It only ruled that you can’t sue for a civil rights violation if they fail to read you your Miranda rights.

[rigelkentaurus]

I don’t understand how this is a “threat” to the 5th Amendment. This person was not compelled to talk to or give a statement. One has the inherent right to not speak to law enforcement.

[oldvirginian]

🎯👍

[qwertyz]

Bingo ... a narrow ruling it is!

[Sacajaweau]

Correct....I remember some BIG sports player tried to have his statements hidden. Didn’t work.

[Macho MAGA Man]

All true!

I would still remind people about the General Flynn scenario talking with FBI agent Peter Strzock without a lawyer present.

[Sacajaweau]

If you wanta talk and do....so be it...

There's a difference when you are arresting someone.

[Wayne07]

“From what I’ve read from other sources, the case doesn’t change anything about what is admissible in court. It only ruled that you can’t sue for a civil rights violation if they fail to read you your Miranda rights.”

Misinformation is rampant on Free Republic, and Gateway Pundit is one of the main causes.

[Born in 1950]

You are absolutely right. No debate at all.

Watch vids of defiant, right asserting drivers. Often gets gnarly. Can you do that? Can many others?

[o-n-money]

Please let me know what the law is. I thought Miranda rights were given only after a person is arrested.

[colorado tanker]

More fake news from the lying Democrat news media. This case affirms that Miranda, as modified by some later decisions, remains good law. All this case holds is that Miranda violations do not create a cause of action for damages. What Miranda means is that if a suspect gives a statement without having been Mirandized, that statement cannot be used against him - the original Miranda holding.

This decision does not "gut" Miranda.

[wbarmy]

I spent a lot of time teaching this to my children. If any law enforcement officer or government official asks you a question, direct them to your mother or to me. Do not answer the question unless it is a matter of life or death, i.e. which room is the baby in during a fire.

[af_vet_1981]

Most hospital employees don’t admit they sexually assaulted women in a hospital. They will be judged in a court that does not recognize Miranda, as will their supporters.

[Sacajaweau]

You got it!!

[Lazamataz]

I dunno. By now, if every single person in America isn't aware of the Miranda warning, and their rights, then maybe they are too stupid to be freely wandering our streets.

I mean, it's not like it's a secret.

[BipolarBob]

This person was not compelled to talk to or give a statement. One has the inherent right to not speak to law enforcement.

You're not understanding how this works. Law enforcement will lie/pressure you to talk. They use psychology techniques. They will hold you against your will. Implied threats. They'll say "witnesses claim they saw you assault the victim" when that isn't true. They will claim nonexistent video evidence. Weak minded people will crack under duress such as this.

[joma89]

Agreed and that means never, not even when they are not investiagting anything.