News Lily:
Run out of fresh things to read? Try Newsyndicated
|
News Lily:
Run out of fresh things to read? Try Newsyndicated
| |
| science | technology | opinion | other | worldnews | music | politics | humor | Us_News | The_Economy | pictures | psychology | geekery | lolwut | Culture | All Stories | |
| Sharing is Caring... |
|
|
Home |
About Us |
Register |
Submit Link |
Upcoming |
Top Stories |
Random |
Comment Roll |
Epic Comments |
Blog |
RSS
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
 13 |
Supreme Court sets aside strict ruling on Miranda 'right to remain silent'
By kino101 on 2010-02-27 | 2 comments |
| 1 | kino101 | 2010-02-27 | |
|
just a few comments...I wonder if someone picks the most egregious crimes to get put in front of SCOTUS for the sole purpose of moving their legal agenda forward. number two, Scalia casually shows his 'legal' thinking, 14 days(not 15, 30 or 100 hours) is long enough to outlive their Miranda rights, based on his interpretation, not that of scholars in the field. as if Scalia had ever been through, or have the slightest real knowledge of which he opines about. Makes me wonder what other personal, as opposed to legal reasoning's he uses. Remember the 60 Minutes interview, when asked about his ruling regarding the 2000 election, his response was 'get over it' and third, I can understand the frustration of prosecutors when a legal defense for confessions given under duress and w/out proper help from the law can be stretched so far out of proportion. someone lawers up and is immune from saying anything incriminating for life? and fourth, I dunno, the way things are going, 'questioning' has taken on a whole new significance. If nothing else, a lawyer is at least witness to the treatment meted out to clients. Cops might figure they wait a couple weeks and then beat a confession out of someone and have it hold up in court? so maybe that's how a child molester, after years, could end up in front of SCOTUS getting his just desserts. and the law takes another of a thousand cuts. Reply to this |
| 1 | Ryan | 2010-02-27 | |
just a few comments...I wonder if someone picks the most egregious crimes to get put in front of SCOTUS for the sole purpose of moving their legal agenda forward.They absolutely do. I remember a case a while ago of somebody intentionally getting arrested for marijuana possession so that they could take it to the supreme court. Or maybe that was a dream...or a TV show...or a hallucination or something. Wait...what? Reply to this |