Slashdot Mirror
Supreme Court Decides Your Silence May Be Used Against You
crackspackle writes "The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the State of Texas earlier today in a murder trial where the defendant, prior to be taken into custody, had been questioned by the police and chose to remain silent on key questions. This fact was bought up at trial and used to convict him. Most of us have seen at least enough cop shows to know police must read a suspect their Miranda rights when placing them in custody. The issue was a bit murkier here in that the defendant had not yet been detained and while we all probably thought the freedom from self-incrimination was an implicit right as stated in the Constitution, apparently SCOTUS now thinks you have to claim that right or at least be properly mirandized first."
It appears that if you are "free to leave at any time" you lose a few rights. Fancy trick, up there with getting kids to write apology letters.
I need some more ass wipes.
Prosecutors argued such silence does not have constitutional protection because of the other questions Salinas had answered and since he was not under arrest and was not compelled to speak.
A plurality of the Supreme Court affirmed for Texas Monday, noting that Salinas never expressly invoked the privilege when the officer asked about the shells. It has long been settled that the privilege 'generally is not self-executing' and that a witness who desires its protection 'must claim it...
So rights are a privilege now to be dictated by loose wording and interpretation...fuck. that. shit....oh wait...should be old news in light of all the other bullshittery USDOJ spews.
I have a bullet with SCOTUS' name on it. Oh wait, SCOTUS can change the Constitution of the United States of Amerika now? Lucifer has arrived and his name is Barak Hussein Obama. Death to the infidels in government.
It's an all-or-nothing situation. As sick and tired as I am of this government's shenanigans, even I get this.
Ah, so...
Officer: Hi there, do you work here?
You: Yes.
Officer: Ok, so did you kill Fred?
You: ??? Uh... I should probably talk to a lawyer before I answer any more questions. I have the right to remain silent. 5th amendment.
Officer: You can't selectively apply the 5th amendment, picking and choosing what questions to apply it to. Its an all or nothing situation.
It's an all-or-nothing situation. As sick and tired as I am of this government's shenanigans, even I get this.
I was not aware of this inability to answer a question, and have that mean you can't stop answering questions in the future.
It seems truly ridiculous as demonstrated above. Similarly ridiculous situations apply to interrogation or even on the stand...
Prosecutor: So, you are Jane Doe, that is correct?
You: Yes, that is my name.
Prosecutor: And you've lived here in [city] how many years now?
You: 14
Prosecutor: Did you purchase the knife used to kill Fred?
You: I invoke my 5th...
Prosecutor: Oh... no... gotcha.. You can't start answering some questions and then clam up!
Judge: Answer the question or be held in contempt...
The rest of the country: WTFBBQ?!