Despite what some folks would like to think, the leftosphere is not always wrong. The majority of the time, yes, but it is not a 100% deal.
And so now I am wondering about the latest decision on Miranda. They are making a huge fuss about the decision which, as best as I can glean from it, basically says you need to be very forward with your refusal to talk or sign anything without a lawyer.
It makes sense to me, but I keep butting up against my dislike of giving any more power to the constabulary.
No one that I have seen in the rightosphere is talking about the decision, and while I tend to agree with the Justices in the majority, I am still scratching my head a bit.
Anyone else got a line on this thing? Anyone? Bueller?
Convicts spend most of their time in prison gaming the criminal justice system, and over the years since the original Miranda case was decided by SCOTUS, the recommended game tactic for when you’re arrested is to say nothing. Zip, nada, rien, nothing. The cons think that interrogators can be beaten this way, or tricked into telling the arrestee about THEIR case against him/her.
I think that the SCOTUS simply recognized that the easiest way to end this gaming is to actually make the cons say the words “I want a lawyer” if they want one. That’s all that happened in this case.
Don’t get swept up by the bleeding hearts telling you that this is the beginning of the end, that the rubber hoses will come back out now, etc. That is most certainly NOT the case.
Now, having been a cop for 25 years, I’m here to tell you that some abuses DO occur. The most usual one is when the arresting officer decides that he/she doesn’t need anything from the arrestee, so the interrogation proceeds more as an object lesson in why you don’t fool around with the po-po. That’s just a cop’s way of venting, but it’s also un-necessary and probably an un-constitutional application of non-judicial punishment by the cop.
http://reason.com/archives/2010/06/03/the-supreme-court-hears-the-so
Of course, MRS, in Reason’s view, all cops are evil torturers, and all persons who have attained the interest of the po-po are not only presumed innocent, they really ARE innocent.
In Reason’s view, there’s no evil in the world, only misunderstood people, and cops are trained never to understand.
I’d like to arrest Reason’s editor (charge, impersonating a reasonable person), and sentence him to a month of riding with a NYC police sergeant, on graveyard shift, on the lower East side. Or, in my town, in the hispanic ghetto.
All these elitists can ever do is boo-hoo every time the cops are given 5% of the authority they need to do their jobs properly.
Miranda rights were not “miranda rights” before the Miranda case, all Miranda did was reaffirm the fifth amendment. All the fifth amendment did was reaffirm a natural right.
That a perp isn’t being asked to sign a waiver isn’t a step backwards, it’s a step towards constitutionality. Someone can sit there for days in the interrogation room and say nothing and be completely within their rights. Or they can say “I want a lawyer” or “nessicito lawyer” (sorry don’t know the spanish word for lawyer) and get all lawyered up.
This doesn’t fundamentally change the game. If I ever get arrested, no matter whether I’m guilty or not, I’m going to ask for an attorney.