The Supreme Court Decided Your Silence Can Be Used Against You

[radcen]

The Supreme Court Decided Your Silence Can Be Used Against You

The Supreme Court Decided Your Silence Can Be Used Against You

 

[jamesrage]

The Supreme Court Decided Your Silence Can Be Used Against You

The Supreme Court Decided Your Silence Can Be Used Against You

This is what happens when presidents pick people based on ideology instead of actually sticking with the constitution. The fact is you don't need to cite your 5th amendment rights to use them.By their logic I should have to cite the 1st amendment before writing my elected officials or citing any other amendment before exercising my constitutional rights.

 

[specklebang]

So 5 Conservative judges outvoted the 4 Liberal judges. Isn't that interesting?

 

[PirateMk1]

This is what happens when presidents pick people based on ideology instead of actually sticking with the constitution. The fact is you don't need to cite your 5th amendment rights to use them.By their logic I should have to cite the 1st amendment before writing my elected officials or citing any other amendment before exercising my constitutional rights.

If the moron would have kept his mouth shut period he wouldn't have probably been in this predicament in the first place. This ruling really means not as much as people think, especially if you don't talk to the police at ALL, then ALL they have is your silence which any attorney with minimal education could trash the DA with anyhow. This mook opened his mouth and that's what did him in.

 

[radcen]

If the moron would have kept his mouth shut period he wouldn't have probably been in this predicament in the first place. This ruling really means not as much as people think, especially if you don't talk to the police at ALL, then ALL they have is your silence which any attorney with minimal education could trash the DA with anyhow. This mook opened his mouth and that's what did him in.

Bingo. It's easier to talk oneself into prison than they think.

 

[Captain Adverse]

This is not really as stunning as people think it is. The issue arises when police are asking a suspect questions and the suspect has not invoked his right to an attorney. Instead he is answering questions because he thinks (wrongly) that if he cooperates the police won't consider him a suspect.

Suddenly the cops ask him a direct question involving culpability in the crime, i.e. "Did you shoot Lester Brown?" NOW the suspect shuts up. The Court ruling holds that this "response" may be used against the defendant if he is charged with the crime. It is NOT an admission, but it does serve to show a suspicious act which justified the police's belief he was involved and possibly the perpetrator of the crime.

People have watched enough cop shows (they permeate television these days) to know 1. Keep your mouth shut, and 2. Immediately ask for an attorney.

They don't seem to understand that under arrest or not, if the cops are questioning you then you ARE a possible suspect. It may seem counter-intuitive, but whenever you are being questioned the first thing you need to ask is "Am I under arrest?" If the answer is "No," then ask to leave. If they insist on keeping you there despite repeated requests to leave, then you ARE a suspect and you must IMMEDIATELY state you are not answering any further questions without you lawyer present.

At that point SHUT THE HELL UP! Talk to no-one without your lawyer present. Not the Cops, your folks, you cell-mate, NO ONE! PERIOD!

Then your silence is perfectly protected by the Fifth Amendment.

 

[radcen]

This is not really as stunning as people think it is. The issue arises when police are asking a suspect questions and the suspect has not invoked his right to an attorney. Instead he is answering questions because he thinks (wrongly) that if he cooperates the police won't consider him a suspect.

Suddenly the cops ask him a direct question involving culpability in the crime, i.e. "Did you shoot Lester Brown?" NOW the suspect shuts up. The Court ruling holds that this "response" may be used against the defendant if he is charged with the crime. It is NOT an admission, but it does serve to show a suspicious act which justified the police's belief he was involved and possibly the perpetrator of the crime.

People have watched enough cop shows (they permeate television these days) to know 1. Keep your mouth shut, and 2. Immediately ask for an attorney.

They don't seem to understand that under arrest or not, if the cops are questioning you then you ARE a possible suspect. It may seem counter-intuitive, but whenever you are being questioned the first thing you need to ask is "Am I under arrest?" If the answer is "No," then ask to leave. If they insist on keeping you there despite repeated requests to leave, then you ARE a suspect and you must IMMEDIATELY state you are not answering any further questions without you lawyer present.

At that point SHUT THE HELL UP! Talk to no-one without your lawyer present. Not the Cops, your folks, you cell-mate, NO ONE! PERIOD!

Then your silence is perfectly protected by the Fifth Amendment.

Absolutely. They believe they are not a suspect and/or they overestimate their ability to talk their way out of it.

As to your 4th paragraph, yes again... if you find yourself sitting in an interrogation room, don't be fooled by non-arrest status or "We're just having a chat" or the 'person of interest' label, you ARE a suspect.

 

[rhinefire]

I forget who exactly said it but it has been said our rights will never be ripped from us instead very gradually chipped away. We are in grave danger and there are no signs of anything getting better.

 

[Surtr]

The Supreme Court Decided Your Silence Can Be Used Against You

The Supreme Court Decided Your Silence Can Be Used Against You

Wouldn't be the first time the Supreme Court was wrong.