Posted on 06/23/2022 11:16:09 AM PDT by Macho MAGA Man
The entire Miranda Warning thing is bogus anyway. In no way is a good warning and it is not even something cops should be doing.
Fir Miranda to attach.. two thing must be met…custody and questioning… he wasn’t in custody
A strange ruling, IMHO...
Mirandizing applies at the point at which the person becomes targeted as an actual criminal suspect. In this case the person being asked questions was already the subject of a rape compliant, o it’s hard to argue they weren’t a suspect. Police can ask non-suspects informational questions all day long without Mirandizing. If the police asked something like, “Heard any good rape claims about this hospital lately?”, and the person confesses, that’s not a Miranda problem.
The court’s ruling the status quo in place. The only remedy for Miranda violations remains excluding statements (and evidence that derived from them) from court when made prior to a criminal suspect being “Mirandized”. The suspects can’t sue the investigator for not Mirandizing them. The ruling does zip to the 5th amendment.
Of course.
Exactly.🤔
You are correct. First though, officers are not required to Mirandize someone just because they make an arrest. But, once the person is in custody, then the Miranda rights must be read before the suspect is questioned.
I was referring to the deviant opinion that somehow he deserved Miranda protection after confessing to raping an incapacitated patient.
I have always maintained that a great part of the value of a Miranda Warning is in reminding law enforcement of the limits of their authority. (A Military Policeman once threatened to bust my friend's head. I'm pretty sure the MP exceeded his authority to even suggest such a thing.)
I would add the following to the end of the Warning; "I, as a law enforcement officer, am not allowed to beat a confession out of you nor am I allowed to question you for more than three hours without providing you water, food, and an hour's rest. I am not allowed to question you beyond three hours without your written consent."
Most Freepers are aware of the videos describing why you should not talk to the police. For example, even if you tell the absolute truth, a credible witness may mistakenly contradict you on an unimportant detail thus damaging your credibility in a way that silence could never do.
I have been an MP. I have made such a threat. :)
I think we may be onto something here.
Where were you in 1970?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.