Skip to main content

View Diary: Tsarnaev Presumed Guilty: Government Leaks Ill-Gotten Incriminating Statements (180 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  there's a split, it seems (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Adam B

    some courts say that the reasons for the public safety exception allow questioning to proceed anyway -- public safety is public safety.  Others note the PSE cases still require the statement to be voluntary, and the Edwards v. Arizona rule that requesting an attorney ends the investigation is a bright line rule.  

    Most federal courts (4th, 9th circuits; all DC Courts) seem to allow it; a number of states do not (Iowa, Illinois).  These cases seem to be dicta or distinguishable, though.  The cases saying no tend to also find the public safety exception didn't apply in the first place; or else find that even if statements were admitted improperly, it'd have been harmless error.  None of these facts were quite as dramatic as these - the govt already seems to be pushing.

    A key significance of requesting counsel is the govt couldn't use the trick of demanding a post-interrogation miranda waiver.

    I wonder, as well, if this affects plea bargaining -- the govt doesn't want to set a precedent rejecting the Holder memo, even on a pretty extreme set of facts.  Could be pennywise pound foolish by the feds.

    Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

    by Loge on Fri May 03, 2013 at 11:40:48 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site