Posted on 07/01/2005 5:37:19 AM PDT by kx9088
(CNN) -- A Florida man's confession that he kidnapped, raped and buried alive a 9-year-old girl may never be heard by a jury because, according to documents, he previously asked for a lawyer but was not given one.
John Couey, accused of murder in the death of Jessica Lunsford, asked for an attorney on March 17, the day before he confessed, according to the transcript of his questioning released by police.
At the time of his request, Couey was maintaining he had nothing to do with the girl's disappearance. His request came after Citrus County, Florida, detectives asked him if he would take a lie detector test.
...
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
It will be beyond outrageous if this monster somehow gets off.
It's likely that even sans confessions they have enough on him that he'll be found guilty though, so I doubt he'll ever be on the streets again.
I find it very depressing to live in a time when street justice increasingly seems like the only recourse. Our criminal justice system/judicial system is very broken.
bump
>>>A Florida man's confession that he kidnapped, raped and buried alive a 9-year-old girl may never be heard by a jury because, according to documents, he previously asked for a lawyer but was not given one. >>>
IDIOTS!!!!
That is no technicality, that is a flagrant denial of a right as a US Citizen. Jesus, if this guy gets off because of some stupid cops then I hope they get their own street justice. Let's hope there is enough physical evidence to convict him.
Just damn, this is same police force that did not search the trailer Jessica was in (and alive) for three days, right across the street from her home.
And hope that the physical evidence isn't derived from the results of police misconduct.
I think that I wouldn't say it is broken, rather it needs to be adjusted to give the perps less power.
I'm sorry, but just because you ask for a lawyer doesn't mean the interview has to stop. I really can't think of a situation where an innocent person would need to invoke their rights to an attorney.
I agree strongly. Blame the police for bungling this one. They know the laws and if they screwed up, they should be out of a job. Then they can apply the needed street justice.
Even if you are innocent, the police have ways of pressuring you that you may never have experienced. They will twist what you say to make you look guilty and use your responses to try and convict you, even if you are innocent. The police and prosecutors want convictions, not necessarily justice. Having a lawyer present lets you have some measure of protection and will make the police actually have to gather evidence (i.e. work). Many people have confessed to crimes they were innocent of just to end the pressure and stress of the interrogation.
If they throw THAT out, I will be beyond appalled.
A confession mingled with a request for a lawyer, if it happened that way, should definitely be admitted.
Charlie Crist is the likely Repub candidate for governor to replace Jeb Bush. If he screws this up, it's going to be hard to get him over. He's a puffed up little poseur anyway...
This bozo isn't going anywhere.
There is not a person living in the US today over the age of 10 that has not heard the miranda rules read at least a hundred times, it is not a deep dark secret hidden from the public that you have a right to keep quiet or a right to a lawyer.
But even with all that, I would only make one change. Anyone that has ever been arristed, tried and convicted should from that point on be assumed to know and understand their Miranda rights and can not later claim they were not told of their rights.
What if you are innocent, but your alibi may be embarassing or actually another illegal activity.
"I didn't rob the bank,
...I was out poaching on my neighbor's property
...Watching a movie at the porn theatre
...Cheating on my husband
...Installing an illegal bathroom in my friend's house
...Having a few drinks before I drove home
...Throwing up because I knew my brother was robbing the bank, etc.
You may legitamately want to consult with an attorney before answering making a statement to the police. We shouldn't be easily compelled to divulge information about our activities or whereabouts to the police. I'm not saying we wouldn't want to be or shouldn't be cooperative, just that you don't want to open that door to a coersive police state.
Was it the Elizabeth Smart or another high-profile kidnapping where the police nearly coerced an ex-offender into confessing to the crime he did not commit? I recall the suspect stroked out and died either in custody or immediately after being released. Until the guilty party was found and he was posthumously exonerated the public perception was that he was involved.
If it was my daughter, you wouldnt have to worry about a trial.
"Take what you want and pay for it" is the operative phrase here. BTW, for those of you from Rio Linda that means I fully understand the potential consequences of my own actions.
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.