Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
29 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Bye, bye 5th rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Here's a fun take on a SCOTUS ruling.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rusty McFisticuffs
United States
Arcata
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Bye, vye 5th
I didn't understand that thing. She was saying that your silence can be used against you unless you explicitly invoke the 5th amendment? How is that a big deal--isn't everyone here going to explicitly invoke the 5th every time they talk to police anyway, after seeing that lecture DWTripp & others have posted here?

(And she says "Miranda rights" more than once; I thought they were your constitutional rights, and the Miranda warning was just to remind you of them. Every time she said that, I became more doubtful about the rest of what she was saying.)

(And WTF was the point of the drum track while she was talking? Damn kids! Get off my lawn!)
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Bye, vye 5th
Why is she shouting?

Also: I don't see how your 5th would protect you from being silent, even under miranda. 'I asked him, he didn't answer.' you aren't being made a witness against yourself. I could of course be wrong, but at 8am it seems fine.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
kuhrusty wrote:
I didn't understand that thing. She was saying that your silence can be used against you unless you explicitly invoke the 5th amendment?

1. You have to invoke it aloud and silence before that can be used against you.

Quote:
How is that a big deal

How isn'tit?
Quote:
--isn't everyone here going to explicitly invoke the 5th every time they talk to police anyway, after seeing that lecture DWTripp & others have posted here?

They should btthis undermines that ability.
Quote:
(And she says "Miranda rights" more than once; I thought they were your constitutional rights, and the Miranda warning was just to remind you of them. Every time she said that, I became more doubtful about the rest of what she was saying.)

Yes, the point is that the Constitutional rights codified in the Miranda warning are being ignored and undermined.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Agent J
United States
Coldwater
Michigan
flag msg tools
He's looking real sharp in his 1940's fedora. He's got nerves of steel, an iron will, and several other metal-themed attributes. His fur is water tight and he's always up for a fight.
badge
He's a semi-aquatic egg-laying mammal of action. He's a furry little flat-foot who'll never flinch from a fray. He's got more than just mad skills, he's got a beaver tail and a bill.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If I have the right to remain silent, how am I supposed to say that AND exercise my right to remain silent at the same time?

This is a huge shift away from what the law previously meant, which was that your silence could not be used against you at all regardless of whether or not you specifically invoked the right or not - your silence was considered your invocation of that right.

Silence has always been admissible in civil court, though.

Miranda rights is a perfectly acceptable term for the rights that are included in the Miranda warnings. It stems from the Constitution but in order to specify exactly which Constitutional rights we're talking about, Miranda is as good a term as any to specify your right to remain silent.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
kuhrusty wrote:
I didn't understand that thing. She was saying that your silence can be used against you unless you explicitly invoke the 5th amendment? How is that a big deal--isn't everyone here going to explicitly invoke the 5th every time they talk to police anyway, after seeing that lecture DWTripp & others have posted here?

(And she says "Miranda rights" more than once; I thought they were your constitutional rights, and the Miranda warning was just to remind you of them. Every time she said that, I became more doubtful about the rest of what she was saying.)

(And WTF was the point of the drum track while she was talking? Damn kids! Get off my lawn!)
Not everyone uses BGG.:devil:
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Reading about the case what is worrying is the fact he was not under arrest, and thus not even a suspect at the time.

Basically this says "if you have not been arrested don't talk to the police ever".

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Agent J
United States
Coldwater
Michigan
flag msg tools
He's looking real sharp in his 1940's fedora. He's got nerves of steel, an iron will, and several other metal-themed attributes. His fur is water tight and he's always up for a fight.
badge
He's a semi-aquatic egg-laying mammal of action. He's a furry little flat-foot who'll never flinch from a fray. He's got more than just mad skills, he's got a beaver tail and a bill.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
Reading about the case what is worrying is the fact he was not under arrest, and thus not even a suspect at the time.

Basically this says "if you have not been arrested don't talk to the police ever".



If he's not under arrest then Miranda rights don't apply.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This does seem like a pretty big deal. I can see the argument that by answering some questions and then not answering one it's reasonable to say, "He said A, B and C but wouldn't answer our question about D," but I think the 5th should trump this and it should be out of court.

I imagine a situation in which I witness a crime. The Police are asking me questions about what I saw. Then they ask, hypothetically, where my .357 magnum is currently located and I realize they may suspect me of being involved. I say I'm only going to answer further questions with my lawyer present (or invoke my right to remain silent). Why couldn't they then testify that I answered questions freely until they asked about my gun and then suddenly I invoked my right to attorney and/or to remain silent?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jythier wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Reading about the case what is worrying is the fact he was not under arrest, and thus not even a suspect at the time.

Basically this says "if you have not been arrested don't talk to the police ever".



If he's not under arrest then Miranda rights don't apply.

Um, so the Constitution only applies when you're arrested in the US?! That explains a lot.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jythier wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Reading about the case what is worrying is the fact he was not under arrest, and thus not even a suspect at the time.

Basically this says "if you have not been arrested don't talk to the police ever".



If he's not under arrest then Miranda rights don't apply.
Yes, I think that is my point. That in effect no one should talk to the police unless they are under arrest.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
b a n j o wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Reading about the case what is worrying is the fact he was not under arrest, and thus not even a suspect at the time.

Basically this says "if you have not been arrested don't talk to the police ever".



Yes. And if you DO talk to the police, make sure not to annoy them, or they'll kill a pet.
No, if their dog attacks the police they will shoot the dog.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Agent J
United States
Coldwater
Michigan
flag msg tools
He's looking real sharp in his 1940's fedora. He's got nerves of steel, an iron will, and several other metal-themed attributes. His fur is water tight and he's always up for a fight.
badge
He's a semi-aquatic egg-laying mammal of action. He's a furry little flat-foot who'll never flinch from a fray. He's got more than just mad skills, he's got a beaver tail and a bill.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
whac3 wrote:
Jythier wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Reading about the case what is worrying is the fact he was not under arrest, and thus not even a suspect at the time.

Basically this says "if you have not been arrested don't talk to the police ever".



If he's not under arrest then Miranda rights don't apply.

Um, so the Constitution only applies when you're arrested in the US?! That explains a lot.


The Constitution still applies. Miranda doesn't. IE, they don't have to inform you of your rights until you're under arrest. So we're not talking about Miranda rights at all. Silly newscastor.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jythier wrote:
whac3 wrote:
Jythier wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Reading about the case what is worrying is the fact he was not under arrest, and thus not even a suspect at the time.

Basically this says "if you have not been arrested don't talk to the police ever".



If he's not under arrest then Miranda rights don't apply.

Um, so the Constitution only applies when you're arrested in the US?! That explains a lot.


The Constitution still applies. Miranda doesn't. IE, they don't have to inform you of your rights until you're under arrest. So we're not talking about Miranda rights at all. Silly newscastor.
Except that apparently if you are not under arrest the constitution does not apply. It seems that as he went voluntarily to the police station, and agreed to talk once he refused to answer a question he was no longer entitled to a right to silence. This is what I was referring to, the fact that if you agree to talk to the Police (at least in Texas) you (apparently) waive your right to silence.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Agent J
United States
Coldwater
Michigan
flag msg tools
He's looking real sharp in his 1940's fedora. He's got nerves of steel, an iron will, and several other metal-themed attributes. His fur is water tight and he's always up for a fight.
badge
He's a semi-aquatic egg-laying mammal of action. He's a furry little flat-foot who'll never flinch from a fray. He's got more than just mad skills, he's got a beaver tail and a bill.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I guess I don't understand the whole 'answer a question, waive your rights' crap, because it's not really based on anything solid except that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
casey r lowe
United States
butte
Montana
flag msg tools
mb
Jythier wrote:
If I have the right to remain silent, how am I supposed to say that AND exercise my right to remain silent at the same time?

sounds like a perfect catch-22 to me: he didnt proclaim his 5th amendment rights by staying silent and he didnt make use of his right to remain silent by claiming his 5th amendment rights
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
He was not compelled to testify against himself. All they did was outline the events of his interview it seems. If you want some instructional stuff in this situatiin he should perhaps have asked if he was a suspect in the crime(which would have put them in the position of halting questioning untill they could arrest and mirandizing, or setting up the easy appeal if he was later accused)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Cates
United States
Visalia
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Seems silly to use the silence against the suspect. Wouldn't the fact that the shells at the crime scene match up with his shotgun be better evidence?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I wish there was more concrete info instead of just fhis lady's arglebargle. I am willing to guess that the silence wasn't a key part of the case so muchas something mentioned as a part of the whole case, and the defense saught a mistrial based on the fact that it was admitted or something simar,and it simply didn't make the grade. But you can't shout about 'convicted felon takes a long shot, loses.'
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shadrach wrote:
He was not compelled to testify against himself. All they did was outline the events of his interview it seems. If you want some instructional stuff in this situatiin he should perhaps have asked if he was a suspect in the crime(which would have put them in the position of halting questioning untill they could arrest and mirandizing, or setting up the easy appeal if he was later accused)
If only everyone was a qualified lawyer, what are people thinking?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
He was not compelled to testify against himself. All they did was outline the events of his interview it seems. If you want some instructional stuff in this situatiin he should perhaps have asked if he was a suspect in the crime(which would have put them in the position of halting questioning untill they could arrest and mirandizing, or setting up the easy appeal if he was later accused)
If only everyone was a qualified lawyer, what are people thinking?


Yeah, being a polity that educates itself on basic rights, what an outrageous concept for a democratic nation. Much better to allow an elevated elite to protect us from the capricies of the powers that be.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shadrach wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
He was not compelled to testify against himself. All they did was outline the events of his interview it seems. If you want some instructional stuff in this situatiin he should perhaps have asked if he was a suspect in the crime(which would have put them in the position of halting questioning untill they could arrest and mirandizing, or setting up the easy appeal if he was later accused)
If only everyone was a qualified lawyer, what are people thinking?


Yeah, being a polity that educates itself on basic rights, what an outrageous concept for a democratic nation. Much better to allow an elevated elite to protect us from the capricies of the powers that be.
Even your law makers cannot agree on what are your basic rights.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
He was not compelled to testify against himself. All they did was outline the events of his interview it seems. If you want some instructional stuff in this situatiin he should perhaps have asked if he was a suspect in the crime(which would have put them in the position of halting questioning untill they could arrest and mirandizing, or setting up the easy appeal if he was later accused)
If only everyone was a qualified lawyer, what are people thinking?


Yeah, being a polity that educates itself on basic rights, what an outrageous concept for a democratic nation. Much better to allow an elevated elite to protect us from the capricies of the powers that be.
Even your law makers cannot agree on what are your basic rights.


They cannot agree on what they want our basic rights to be. Why let overlords decide in seclusion? When people lull their heads out and choose rather than let be chosen, it freqently works out better. Recent case in point: Gay marriage. It wasn't any top-down pronouncement that secured the change, it was enough people deciding that yeah, treating other people deceny isn't such a bad thing after all. The politicians jumped on bandwagons and rode them to success or failure, but they weren't the drivers.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Shadrach wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Shadrach wrote:
He was not compelled to testify against himself. All they did was outline the events of his interview it seems. If you want some instructional stuff in this situatiin he should perhaps have asked if he was a suspect in the crime(which would have put them in the position of halting questioning untill they could arrest and mirandizing, or setting up the easy appeal if he was later accused)
If only everyone was a qualified lawyer, what are people thinking?


Yeah, being a polity that educates itself on basic rights, what an outrageous concept for a democratic nation. Much better to allow an elevated elite to protect us from the capricies of the powers that be.
Even your law makers cannot agree on what are your basic rights.


They cannot agree on what they want our basic rights to be. Why let overlords decide in seclusion? When people lull their heads out and choose rather than let be chosen, it freqently works out better. Recent case in point: Gay marriage. It wasn't any top-down pronouncement that secured the change, it was enough people deciding that yeah, treating other people deceny isn't such a bad thing after all. The politicians jumped on bandwagons and rode them to success or failure, but they weren't the drivers.
Yes? but what has this got to do with expecting people to know their rights. This is why this case was such a shock to so many (supposedly intelligent) people, you seem to think they are a bit thick, people who did not in fact know their rights (despite believing themselves to be well informed on such matters.

The problem of course is that those rights stem from a document write (well over) 200 years ago by people more interested in a political fudge then a workable code of rights. Thus it is dated, vague and written in a way that even (highly trained and intelligent) professionals find confusing and contradictory.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jythier wrote:
whac3 wrote:
Jythier wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
Reading about the case what is worrying is the fact he was not under arrest, and thus not even a suspect at the time.

Basically this says "if you have not been arrested don't talk to the police ever".



If he's not under arrest then Miranda rights don't apply.

Um, so the Constitution only applies when you're arrested in the US?! That explains a lot.


The Constitution still applies. Miranda doesn't. IE, they don't have to inform you of your rights until you're under arrest. So we're not talking about Miranda rights at all. Silly newscastor.

Niranda is just a reminder of Constitutional rights.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.