SCOTUS rules you must speak up if you want your right to remain silent!

SCOTUS rules you must speak up if you want your right to remain silent!

This is a discussion on SCOTUS rules you must speak up if you want your right to remain silent! within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Surprised no one has posted this yet. Supreme Court Rules on Miranda Protections - AOL News J...

Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Member Array ROFL SQUAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    , Location, Location.
    Posts
    473

    SCOTUS rules you must speak up if you want your right to remain silent!

    Surprised no one has posted this yet.

    Supreme Court Rules on Miranda Protections - AOL News

    J
    If you're going to carry one weapon, might as well carry two, because as the saying goes, "Two is one, and one is none."

    "Liberals can decline or whine, but I will still carry and conceal mine." - Cold Warrior. Excellent quote good sir!


  2. #2
    Ex Member Array WhoWeBePart1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    762
    washingtonpost.com

    WASHINGTON -- Want to invoke your right to remain silent? You'll have to speak up.

    In a narrowly split decision, the Supreme Court's conservative majority expanded its limits on the famous Miranda rights for criminal suspects on Tuesday - over the dissent of new Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who said the ruling turned Americans' rights of protection from police abuse "upside down."

  3. #3
    Member Array UncleDannie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Livingston, TX
    Posts
    157
    Well, it's a 5-4 ruling. As soon as additional SCOTUS members are appointed by the current president, there is a good chance this one may be re-visited. What is interesting was Justice Sotomayor ruling, which pretty much resolves any doubt about her ideology.
    Uncle Dannie
    FOP Lodge 55, RPOAC, NRA Life Member

    One of the keys to happiness is a bad memory

  4. #4
    Member Array BurgDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    130
    No, actually, you invoke your right to remain silent by - wait for it - remaining silent. That is your right, you don't need to speak up to invoke or exercise it.

  5. #5
    Distinguished Member Array Agave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    West Tennessee
    Posts
    1,464
    Quote Originally Posted by BurgDog View Post
    No, actually, you invoke your right to remain silent by - wait for it - remaining silent. That is your right, you don't need to speak up to invoke or exercise it.
    That is true. However, if you choose to do so in that manner, you are still subject to questions. If you want the questions stopped, you have to say that you don't want to answer any questions. It's not different than it has been.
    The preceding post may contain sarcasm; it's just better that way. However, it is still intended with construction and with the Love of my L-rd Y'shua.

    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor, Tennessee Certified Instructor

  6. #6
    VIP Member
    Array atctimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NSA Headquarters
    Posts
    6,425
    This is so funny it's almost sad. I mean really, what are the new rules? Police will not be allowed to ask you questions if you tell them you don't want to talk? Really? How in the world is that gonna work?

    Officer: You are under arrest!

    BG: I'd like to invoke my right to remain silent.

    Officer: Ok it's your right, but what is you name? Do you need to use the bathroom? Would you like something to drink while we wait for your lawyer?

    Bg: Help! My rights are being trampled.

    The whole point is that they cannot compel you to incriminate yourself. Nowhere in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights does it say they can't ask questions. It just say they can't MAKE you answer.

    Police had been given a wide degree of latitude when trying to elicit a confession and it was up to the citizen to remain silent (It is THEIR right after all). I think that is pretty much done for.
    It is surely true that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink. Nor can you make them grateful for your efforts.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Array canav844's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    589
    It's if you say you understand your rights, then it's up to you to actually have understood them. There is no obligation on the behalf of the police to reread you your rights every time they talk to you.

    I think the only thing this changes is the ease with which the media outlets can spit out misleading titles.

    Glock Certified Armorer

  8. #8
    Senior Member Array DPro.40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    611
    Whats the difference. I want to remain silent and by the way, throw in my Lawyer on your way out the door. Your still Lawyering up. I'm sure the BG's will get the hang of it soon enough.
    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
    Ronald Reagan

  9. #9
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,662

    re: DPro

    Quote Originally Posted by DPro.40 View Post
    Whats the difference. I want to remain silent and by the way, throw in my Lawyer on your way out the door. Your still Lawyering up. I'm sure the BG's will get the hang of it soon enough.
    Yes, the BG will get the hang of it pretty soon, but ordinary folks caught up in situations where they need to keep their mouths shut, such as after a SD shooting, won't get it.

    We had a stable established rule, which has just been turned on its head.

    The right to remain silent should mean exactly that. It isn't the right to ask to remain silent, state that you wish to remain silent, or any such
    judicial double speak.

    The court erred, as these pro-authoritarian activist conservative justices frequently do. You will see this aspect of their character come home to roost when they do absolutely nothing worthwhile (from the 2A viewpoint many here hold) in the Chicago gun case, because their
    natural inclination is to give all the doubt to the LEOs and to legislatures, and rights be d......

    Sotomayor's dissent got it right.

    Now, the result of the ruling did produce a just end. The guy convicted himself with his own confession by answering some questions, staying silent on others, and then getting tripped up. So the practical result of upholding the conviction--in the sense that justice is served-- is ok. And oddly, an injustice would have resulted if they had ruled in the defendant's favor.

    But what they just did is not an OK decision as a matter of general practice. Of course, we are stuck with it now as it may be 40 years before the makeup of the court changes such that this can be reconsidered.

    Also, since the court previously had required very specific wording of the Miranda warning everyone is now familiar with, perhaps they should have added a requirement that the Miranda warning itself explain that to exercise your right you must speak up. Doing that would at least making the playing field fair.

  10. #10
    Member Array MSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    414
    There is no real change.
    I think the meat of this case, was that the guy refused to sign the paperwork saying he'd been read his rights. Why would he do that? IMO it was so that if he did say the wrong thing, he could always claim the cops didn't read him his rights (after all, he didn't sign saying they did), or he could claim as he did that he was remaining silent (even though he talked).

    I don't know how it works for civilian law enforcement, but when we do it in the Army, refusing to sign the paperwork is the same as waiving you rights.
    http://www.army.mil/USAPA/eforms/pdf/A3881.PDF
    Its on the second page under special instructions.
    AlabamaConstitution of 1819: That every citizen has a right to bear arms in defence of himself and the state.
    The world doesn't owe you anything. It was here first.-Mark Twain
    "Life's tough. It's tougher if you're stupid."-John Wayne
    Sig P228; Micro Desert Eagle; S&W M&P Compact .357 sig

  11. #11
    Member Array Benthic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by UncleDannie View Post
    Well, it's a 5-4 ruling. As soon as additional SCOTUS members are appointed by the current president, there is a good chance this one may be re-visited. What is interesting was Justice Sotomayor ruling, which pretty much resolves any doubt about her ideology.
    SCOTUS can't revisit this, or any other issue, just because they feel like it. A new case will have to be filed and work it's way through the system all the way back up to the Supreme Court. Only they will they have the opportunity to re-visit the issue.

    Brian

  12. #12
    Member Array HuttoAg96's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    132
    I'm not upset at all about the decision. It only seems LOGICAL to me that, if you want the police to stop questioning you, you need to SAY it. Otherwise, when are they supposed to stop trying to break down a suspect? 30 seconds after he doesn't answer a question? 1 minute? 1 hour?

    Any dipsh.. who has ever watched TV should realize that you can stop questioning with a single, powerful word... "LAWYER".

  13. #13
    Member Array BurgDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    The right to remain silent should mean exactly that. It isn't the right to ask to remain silent, state that you wish to remain silent, or any such
    judicial double speak.
    The right to remain silent has always meant exactly that. You don't need to and have never needed to ASK to remain silent - you just have to remain silent - no permission required.

    If you want something, like a drink, or a lawyer, or the cops to stop bugging you with questions, then, of course, you need to communicate what you want to them as they cant read your mind.

  14. #14
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,662

    re: BurgDOg

    Quote Originally Posted by BurgDog View Post
    The right to remain silent has always meant exactly that. You don't need to and have never needed to ASK to remain silent -
    I believe that just changed with the present ruling, but since I have not read it and got all info from the newspapers, perhaps you are correct.

    What I have seen, and reading the portion of Sotomayor's dissent which was published, the court has per her words turned this on its head, and I agree with her.

  15. #15
    Member Array BurgDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    130
    The decision said that the person being questioned must speak up to stop the questioning. The dissent was trying to push the idea that not saying anything (for some unknown and unknowable amount of time) was the equivalent to a demand to stop the questioning. Nothing about any of this had to do with the actual "remain silent" right, just the stop questioning part. Van Chester Thompkins DID remain silent over most of the questioning but chose to break his silence and answer a question the answer of which was used to convict him.

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Va. Judge rules New Healthcare law unconstitutional...surely headed for SCOTUS
    By jwhite75 in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: December 16th, 2010, 05:32 PM
  2. SCOTUS--Court Rules in Gun Case
    By falcon1 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: December 10th, 2007, 10:33 PM
  3. Airmen! Remain seated and don't put down your coffee!
    By Cupcake in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: May 21st, 2007, 08:57 PM
  4. Firearm-related fatalities remain at record low
    By Rock and Glock in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: March 21st, 2006, 11:34 PM
  5. You Have The Right To Remain Silent.....
    By Captain Crunch in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: December 26th, 2005, 01:57 PM

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors