Replies

I think is is perfectly legitimate for the government to use evidence of your demeanor following a crime including your failure to ask about the condition of a child that was critically injured in a crash in which you were involved.

I sure hope you are not an attorney or in any way associated with the jurisprudence system.

Asking about the other parties condition could ALSO be introduced, as a 'guilty conscience' presumption of guilt.

Silence IS the correct behavior, ALL speaking should be done through an attorney.

California just nullified that.

I sure hope you are not an attorney or in any way associated with the jurisprudence system.

Yes I am an attorney.

Asking about the other parties condition could ALSO be introduced, as a 'guilty conscience' presumption of guilt.

In this case the issue was not being guilty of causing the crash, the issue was whether or not the defendant showed a callous disregard of life. In that case, had he asked about the condition of the people in the other car, it would have been evidence of having at least some concern for the lives of the other people. However his callous refusal to inquire as to their well being was quite relevant to his state of mind, which was the primary issue in the case.

BTW, Since when did the Miranda decision become the holy grail of constitutional conservatives?