• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Supreme Court Decided Your Silence Can Be Used Against You

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,800
Reaction score
16,459
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
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

Discount Philosopher
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2012
Messages
11,524
Reaction score
6,769
Location
Las Vegas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
So 5 Conservative judges outvoted the 4 Liberal judges. Isn't that interesting?
 

PirateMk1

Resident Martian ;)
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 28, 2012
Messages
16,879
Reaction score
8,086
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
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

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
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

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
15,898
Reaction score
20,881
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
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

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,574
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
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

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
8,480
Reaction score
2,067
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
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.
 
Top Bottom