Yeah, it’s called the fifth amendment, and it applies to cops as well. That said, it is hard to believe they determined that Shooting was good without him explaining his state of mind and what he witnessed.
“That said, it is hard to believe they determined that Shooting was good without him explaining his state of mind and what he witnessed.”
President Trump supported more investigations than this killer did.
There’s a huge difference between them not asking and him not volunteering information, vs. them calling him in and questioning him, and him asserting his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. Sometimes they haul people before both Congress and national TV, just to ask them questions they already know won’t be answered, just to get to show the world them pleading the Fifth on national TV.
I think it might be appropriate to remove a few Constitutional rights from government agents, who were acting in their official capacity when they committed (or, were suspected of committing) wrongdoing: the right to remain silent, the statute of limitations, and, when “inconvenient” evidence is lost, destroyed, or “accidentally deleted”, or not recorded when there is otherwise a requirement to record it, the presumption of innocence should also go.
“Yeah, it’s called the fifth amendment, and it applies to cops as well. “
Yeah, it’s called a Garrity warning and cops are almost always compelled to give a statement as a condition of employment. It cannot be used on the criminal side, but it IS used to see if they complied with training, policies, and procedures because it was compelled. Failure to sit for that interview is cause for termination.