Skip to main content

View Diary: Lindsey Graham (Dipshit-SC) is a Threat to the Rule of Law (198 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You don't have to tell him he has ANY rights. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Kentucky DeanDemocrat

    Would you say that Graham and Obama are in agreement on this issue?

    Personally, I think you're playing with fire when you don't Mirandize US citizens. You can give Miranda rights to a suspect and offer immunity (or other concessions) at the same time. Seriously, not reading someone their rights because you're worried about an imminent threat? It allows you to torture and then give Miranda rights later. That's the purpose. I can beat a confession out of your ass or lie to you without a lawyer present with no repercussions, and then officially arrest you.

    That's my understanding of the exception. I could claim that you're a public safety concern, threaten your family and refuse to let you speak with an attorney. And I could use the information I gathered in a court of law.

    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

    by HairyTrueMan on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 08:36:22 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  I disagree with the idea of the exception (3+ / 0-)

      And don't think it should be used; however torture is still illegal by multiple statutes and the exception absolutely does not legalize torture.

    •  None of this is covered (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      by the public safety exception.

      It is a brief period of time when investigators can ASK questions, and have the answers admissible in court.

      It does not remove any rights. It does not authorise rendition. It does not replace US Laws on torture.

      Even without the rights being read, any person still has those rights and is entitled to remain silent.

      I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
      but I fear we will remain Democrats.

      Who is twigg?

      by twigg on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 09:28:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  How brief is brief? (0+ / 0-)

        This doesn't seem to have been defined.  We know it's at least 50 minutes.  But could it be two days?  A week? A year? Ten years?

        “What’s the use of having developed a science well enough to make predictions if, in the end, all we’re willing to do is stand around and wait for them to come true?” - Sherwood Rowland

        by jrooth on Sat Apr 20, 2013 at 06:52:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  No no no, you misunderstand. (0+ / 0-)

      He still has the right to speak with an attorney.  The only thing the public safety exception does is that it allows officers not to INFORM him of that.  If he asks for an attorney or says he doesn't want to talk, they have to provide him with an attorney and stop questioning him.

      And you can never beat a confession out of him, under any circumstances.  Reading him a three sentence boilerplate doesn't change that.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site