Boston Marathon bombings.......

[Kobi]

Originally Posted by Wolfsong

From one pair of Sox to another.......

Look this not reading him his Miranda rights thing is really bugging me. One of the most difficult things about the responsibility of freedom is living up to your own standards. Although we would prefer this kid's head on a stick, I am telling you that most of us are one color triangle or another away from a public safety exception.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is a suspect that has not been convicted of anything yet. As an American citizen he is entitled to a fair and impartial trail by a jury of his peers. Authorities have already withdrawn the charges of these brothers robbing the 7/11.


Although I am NOT in favor of letting someone who murdered Americans free....I do however support and defend the Constitution of the United States......that means the kid gets a fair trial. He is still a US citizen. We ought to live by what we fought for. If we don't what's it worth?

I understand what you are saying. It just isn't that simple anymore. The Obama administration made the rules more flexible when it comes to terrorism suspects. They did it back in 2010.

From the WSJ:

Matthew Miller, a Justice Department spokesman, said the memo ensures that "law enforcement has the ability to question suspected terrorists without immediately providing Miranda warnings when the interrogation is reasonably prompted by immediate concern for the safety of the public or the agents." He said "the threat posed by terrorist organizations and the nature of their attacks—which can include multiple accomplices and interconnected plots—creates fundamentally different public safety concerns than traditional criminal cases."

Attorney General Eric Holder suggested changing the guidelines last year after dust-ups over Miranda's use in two major domestic-terror arrests. The suspect in the Christmas Day 2009 bombing, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, was questioned by FBI agents for less than an hour before being read his rights. Times Square bombing suspect Faisal Shahzad was questioned for three hours.

In both cases, the administration said suspects provided valuable information to the FBI despite being advised of their rights. But the decision nonetheless provoked criticism from Republicans and some Democrats who said an opportunity to gain time-sensitive intelligence was lost.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...LEFTTopStories


And, from the NYT:

WASHINGTON — The Federal Bureau of Investigation has instructed agents to interrogate suspected “operational terrorists” about immediate threats to public safety without advising them of their Miranda rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present.

A three-page F.B.I. memorandum, dated Oct. 21, 2010, also encouraged agents to use a broad interpretation of public safety-related questions. It said that the “magnitude and complexity” of the terrorist threat justified “a significantly more extensive public safety interrogation without Miranda warnings than would be permissible in an ordinary criminal case.”

“Depending on the facts, such interrogation might include, for example, questions about possible impending or coordinated terrorist attacks; the location, nature and threat posed by weapons that might post an imminent danger to the public; and the identities, locations, and activities or intentions of accomplices who may be plotting additional imminent attacks,” the memo said.

In the Miranda case, the Supreme Court ruled that if prosecutors want to use statements made by the defendant while in custody against him, police must have warned him of his rights before those statements were made. The court later created an exception for answers to questions about immediate threats to public safety.


It is a slippery constitutional slope when one has to weigh protecting the public from imminent danger vs. the rights of one person. I don't usually use Star trek quotes in a serious matter but this fits. "Do needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one."

I don't know the answer.

If I am reading the articles correctly, any self incriminating evidence discovered prior to his Miranda rights can not be used against him in a court of law either. So, it potentially makes charging and prosecuting him a tad more difficult.

But, these are the implications that came with the Patriot Act and 9/11. Anyone, citizen or not, suspected of potential terrorist activities or who is thought to have information about such activities are potentially subject to the same actions. Our houses can be searched without our knowledge or a court order, we can be held without charges or an attorney, we can be questioned without the right to know our rights and without the benefits of an attorney etc.

It's disturbing. It was disturbing to see Boston on lockdown. It was disturbing to see armored vehicles and military/law enforcement people with semi automatic weapons flooding the streets of Watertown. It was disturbing to see a swarm of armed people doing house to house searches. It was disturbing to have shootouts in a residential area. It reminded me of something I have seen in footage from Iran/Iraq/Afghanistan.

Is this the price we pay for the illusion of safety? I dunno. Scary and unsettling shit.

This article was interesting and informative as well:

What rights should Dzhokhar Tsarnaev get and why does it matter?