Jamesb101.com

commentary on Politics and a little bit of everything else

Miranda Warning and Terrorist arrests……..

For as long as I can remember people arrested in America get their Miranda warning recited to them…

Police officers and Fed’s both have the same basic rule to follow….

As soon as possible

Read them their rights……

After  9/11 a lot of people kinda got pissed off and decided to heck with their rights……

But there’s s problem with that…

When the Fed’s get to court…..The first thing the defense attorney is gonna go after is all the information obtained BEFORE said subject was read his/her rights….

Now nobody wants the bad guy/girl to lawyer up…..

But that is THEIR right if we’re trying them in a civilian court…..

I believe the government has the right to find out if the officers or anyone else is in immediate danger BEFORE giving an Miranda warning to a bad guy….

But that has a time line attached to it…

When we get down to the intelligence vs criminal prosecution argumenet….I want the intell..that’s hands down..

But in those cases……the governemenet can’t have it both ways….

Get the information…..

Then cut the deal…..

Don’t give away the process…

People are presumed innocent before convinced by a court of law

Right?

And they have the right against self incrimination…..

Right?

Here’s a Op Ed piece from the New York Times on the issue……

For nearly nine years, the threat of international terrorism has fueled a government jackhammer, cutting away at long-established protections of civil liberties. It has been used to justify warrantless wiretapping, an expansion of the state secrets privilege in federal lawsuits, the use of torture, and the indefinite detention of people labeled enemy combatants. None of these actions were necessary to fight terrorism, and neither is a dubious Obama administration proposal to loosen the Miranda rules when questioning terror suspects and to delay presenting suspects to a judge.

A change to a fundamental constitutional protection like Miranda should not be tossed out on a Sunday talk show with few details and a gauzy justification. If Attorney General Eric Holder really wants to change the rules, he owes the public a much better explanation.

At the most basic level, it is not even clear that the warning requirement can be changed, except from the bench. The Miranda warning was the creation of the Supreme Court as a way of enforcing the Fifth Amendment. Since 1966, it has reduced coerced confessions and reminded suspects that they have legal rights.

The Rehnquist court warned against meddling with the rule in a 2000 decision forbidding Congress to overrule the warnings to suspects, which over the decades became an ingrained law enforcement practice.

In 1984, the court itself added a “public safety” exception to Miranda. If there is an overriding threat to public safety and officers need information from a suspect to deal with it, the court said,the officers can get that information before administering the Miranda warnings and still use it in court. We disagreed with that decision, but in the years since, the exception has become a useful tool to deal with imminent threats.

The question now is whether the exception needs to be enlarged to deal with the threat of terrorism. Clearly an unexploded bomb or a terror conspiracy would constitute a safety threat under the existing rule. But must investigators “Mirandize” a suspect before asking about his financing sources, his experience at overseas training camps, his methods of communication? In a world that is differently dangerous than it was in 1984, these seem to fit logically under the existing exception, without requiring a fundamental change to the rule.

Miranda does not seem to be an impediment to good antiterror police work, as Mr. Holder himself noted on Thursday before the House Judiciary Committee. Investigators questioned Faisal Shahzad, the suspect in the Times Square bombing attempt, for three or four hours before giving him a Miranda warning, receiving useful information both before and after the warning. He readily waived his right to a quick hearing before a judge.

More……..

Advertisements

May 16, 2010 Posted by | Counterpoints, Editorial, Government, Law, Media, PoliticalDog Calls, Politics, Updates | , , | 3 Comments

A conversation……..The Dog and Terry……Laura Bush…..And secret Liberal leanings……And Editorial

In response to the Oligrahkings  Laura Bush Book Review….I give you this conversation and Editorial view…..

Terry….

…….one night after work on the way home whole listening to Laura bush on larry king live on my Sirius radio she stated she is pro gay marriage and very pro-choice on abortion. goes to shoe after years married to a right-winger did not change her views but was VERY quiet for 8 years in the subject. also i knew and read she was a liberal democrat before she married W. in 1977…….

The Dog……

Terry an excellent observation!…..

If you listened close to BOTH her….. and her husband your saw a little of that here and there over the time her husband was in office….

The party line comes first for a politician….

It is one of things I dislike about politics…..

The Politics 101 question in College…

Do you rep your constituents and give up your personal beliefs?

It is one of the reasons I don’t really like the hard right look at things….

Change is a basic fact of our existence….
Things change then….. other things change…..
It is ludicrous to expect the Constitution to be looked at the same way…… 300 years after it was drawn up…….

The times ARE different……

We would be still in the middle ages if we didn’t adapt to change…
Nature adapts all living things to changes……

By changing THEM…..

Nuff said……..

May 14, 2010 Posted by | Blogs, Counterpoints, Editorial, Family, Government, Media, Men, PoliticalDog Calls, Politics, Updates, Women | , , , | 1 Comment

Editorial……Getting used to a Nuclear Iran….

It’s time to get the point…….

Nobody is going to stop Iran from getting a Nuclear weapon…….

There I’ve said it….

The Dog believe that in the end its going to happen…

While the United States keeps carrying on about sanctions…..

The Iranian’s plod on…..

While the State Department trys to get coöperation from Russia and China on sanctions….

The Iranian’s plod on….

While Israeli’s and other countries intelligence services try to sabotage the effort Iranians efforts….

The Iranian’s plod on….

Statements have been made quietly in the open media that an attack by the Israeli’s …or United States will set the effort back…..

But will not stop it….


With all that in mind….

It comes to this…

What will the world…and the Middle East due to cope or counter Iran…

With a nuclear bomb?

That’s where the discussion should be going……..

 

May 9, 2010 Posted by | Blogs, Breaking News, Counterpoints, Editorial, Government, Media, PoliticalDog Calls, Politics, Projections, Updates | , | 5 Comments