2nd bomber not Mirandized......government once again stomping on the constitution. (brainwash, patriot)

[florida.bob]

Originally Posted by squarian

Maybe we could electrify the Black Sea or something?

Hey!! And, add some Alligators ...

[Randomstudent]

Originally Posted by GuyNTexas

Nope, you are incorrect. If you are in the custody of armed men who reject the notion that you have rights, and decide to ignore them, you can say whatever you care to say ... fat lot of good that's going to do you if they ignore you. It's really pretty simple. We all have the right not to be robbed, but try explaining that to the robber, and see how much good it will do you!

They can do that in a purely physics/laws of nature sense, but they will put any chance of conviction at serious risk if they are relying on any of the stuff they gain.

[Chimuelojones]

Originally Posted by newtoli

That's your OPINION only, not the law.

I prefer to avoid the hysterics and opinion, and provide the actual law/facts.

You're entitled to your opinion, that does not make what I stated incorrect.

Lets remember that that provision whether it be part of the patriot act has not been challeged in court as of yet.

The FBI guidance was issued months after Attorney General Eric Holder offered to work with Congress on a law that would let law enforcement delay constitutional Miranda warnings to terror suspects.
Constitutional lawyers and former prosecutors have suggested that Congress could craft such a terrorism exception that could last up to 48 hours - longer than the court-mandated public safety exception that already allows law enforcement to hold off Miranda warnings for a short period during emergencies to save lives.

let us also remember, that neither the Congress nor FBI are the final arbiters of what is constitutional.

[jojajn]

Originally Posted by pghquest

Thats almost correct.

Statesments given before the miranda warning can be admissable in court, provided you arent being detained at the time.

True. However in this case, I am pretty sure that the defendant will be considered detained.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by softblueyz

You need to take a break and stop "wondering".

I'll respect your position when you tell me why I need to care about what you say..

[DCforever]

Mirandizing allows the police to use the suspects statements in a trial. I doubt they need such statements in this case.

[TigerLily24]

Originally Posted by mlassoff

I find it ironic that many of these conservatives who claim to be so in love with the Constitution when it comes to their gun rights are so blase about rights in this case.

Yes, this terrorist piece of dirt doesn't deserve the air he breathes, but you cannot be selective about who gets to exercise their rights and who doesn't. Once you do that, none of us have rights.

This is one of those rare times I agree with the OP and commend him for taking this stand-- if , indeed, the suspect was not Mirandized.

This.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by jojajn

True. However in this case, I am pretty sure that the defendant will be considered detained.

Yes, the individual in question would absolutely be detained. I was speaking in general.

[Nonarchist]

Originally Posted by phonelady61

I have two words for you Patriot Act no miranda needed thank you .

Yes, but doesn't the Patriot Act still require an executive deeming procedure?

Unmirandized arrests require due deeming process.

[KUchief25]

Why the hell is this even an issue to begin with?? Just read the guy his rights and be done with it. He's an American citizen. Unless he's on his deathbed and can't even function.