I didn’t see this posted.
Last nite, the NBC news specifically mentioned that the first thing they would do, would be to read him his Miranda rights.
How much of this is the media jumping the gun? Was he in the condition to understand his rights when he was taken?
re: “ABCNEWS: NO MIRANDA RIGHTS — PUBLIC SAFETY EXCEPTION...”
And since this terrorist is being treated as an American citizen, won’t this be due cause for dismissal by all the lawyers who will be falling over themselves to represent this guy?
The police will not be questioning him until he is out of surgery and given permission by his doctor.
The question asked of him when taken into custody would be his name, birthday, and where are you shot?
let me think here
which terrorist would have access to more information on issues that affect American safety?
The 19 y o who lived his life from age 5 here is USA and never went overseas
OR a man who was close to the head of Al Q , moved all around the ME and coninued with al Q?
He probably wasn’t concious.
Suspects don’t have to be mirandized when they are arrested. They have to be mirandized before they anything they say is used against them.
Interesting. More rights than what was offered to Jose Padilla, but less than what Timothy McVeigh received.
Remember, the sole objective of the Obama DO’J’ is
to ensure all true Islamic terrorists either
are allowed to flee from LEO, OR are protected
overseas, OR are defended by the finest US lawyers,
OR have their cases dismissed, OR other largesse
denied Americans.
There is not an iota of law conformity by Obama,
but treason beyond water in the worlds largest dam.
According to this report, he’s already been Mirandized:
https://twitter.com/MonicaCrowley/status/325416442776403968
Read the freeper thread here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3010038/posts
Hmmmmmmm . . . And Mooch-elle just happened to have a private meeting with the Saudies before hand.
ABCNEWS: NO MIRANDA RIGHTS — PUBLIC SAFETY EXCEPTION...
Coming soon to a TEA Party protest near you.
Guess it was too much trouble to excerpt the part of the article having to do with Miranda rights.
To call the Miranda ruling a “right” is an invitation to let savages like this little animal to go free. Don’t you think it should be the citizen’s responsibility to know their IV, V and VI ammendment rights without having to be reminded of them? I’ve read them, they seem pretty clear to me. You can’t search my home without a warrant signed by a judge, I don’t have to talk to you without knowing why you’re holding me or without counsel, and you have to present your case against me, faced by my accusers in front of a panel of my peers and prove my guilt beyond a doubt. Much as we hate to admit it, this Chechen b@stard is a citizen of this country and should be secure in those rights. Just because we don’t remind him of that doesn’t mean he can go scott free. And if he blabs to the cops without counsel thats his problem.
I also need to add to my previous post that just because a citizen is not reminded of his rights does not mean he is stripped of them.
This is more than not being mirandized, this is stripping him of his rights. We don’t suddenly “poof” obtain the right to remain silent only after we’ve been mirandized.