“Let me get this straight: To preserve your right to remain silent, you have to talk?”
So queried one of tnlib’s readers on Parsley’s Pics yesterday.
After four decades of hearing it on our favorite TV shows, we all know the Miranda warning:
“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me?”
On Tuesday the Supreme Court of the United States made a decision that will weaken a suspect’s rights. The menatality of the Court’s five assenting justices seems to be “Guilty until proven innocent.”
Before Tuesday, HERE, clearly spelled out, were YOUR rights, everyone’s rights who suddenly found themselves suspect in a crime.
Read Parsley’s Pics’s “So goes the Supreme Court” for a clear and concise report on Tuesday’s decision and how it will affect Miranda.
And, be good.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
demwit
Chronicling the absurd, the obnoxious, the outright lies, the occasional truths and the downright mystical out of the mouths of politicians and pundits.
blog author
- B.J.
- South Carolina, United States
- constant learner
faves
- Airth - philosophy & travel
- Bartleby - one-click reference library
- Beth - all things Southern
- Diversity Ink - Bridging the racial gap
- Frodo - Keeper of the Ring
- Hen’s Teeth – ‘Liberal Southern Women: anything this rare is bound to be expensive, honey’
- I See My Dreams - my archived blog
- Margaret & Helen - Two old gals with spunk!
- Murrmurrs - Murr Brewster, 'snortworthy'
- Papamoka's straight talk
- Parsley's Pics - current issues, common sense and good writing
- Pop Culture Dish - Entertainment past & present
- Progress Report - Subscribe!
- Progress Report, top newsletter
- Sue - Helloooo ... Mr. President, are you listening?
- White House - The Blog
fair use notice
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of current issues. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
posts library
-
▼
2010
(131)
-
▼
Jun
(13)
- No losers with health care act
- An orator silenced
- Busting Fox News' BP propaganda
- Step back in time to the problem
- Confluence
- 'You know how he is'
- Update on Warren Jeffs
- Beck's bibliography
- A kick-ass morning!
- Can Obama wield a big stick?
- The immeasurable cost of war
- SCOTUS and Miranda
- The weight of her crown
-
▼
Jun
(13)
3 comments:
This really is an unbelievable decision. But thank you, ma'am, for the link.
The more I learn about this decision, the more convinced I am that the dissenters on the court were right. And the irony of the undoing of a 1996 decision involving an arrest in Arizona is bizarre.
Bit by bit the conservatives chip away at all of our rights. The supreme court in Ohio ruled that police need no material evidence that you might be speeding. If they say, "It looked like you were speeding," that's all it takes to convict you of speeding. Talk about the dumbing down of America!
We see from those supposed to be intelligent people, a LACK of INTELLIGENT QUOTIENT dictating rules/laws for the rest of us. Sad picture isn't it? Especially when the education budget is always the first to get cut from all budgets.
Do the radicals think the Gulf dsaster is God annointing them with Bibllical proportions of oil? How long will the American people sit of their seat of do nothing and let such rule this nation?
How many more rights have to get stripped away before we stand together and say: Enough is Enough!
Post a Comment