Boston bomber an "enemy combatant"?

[derspiess]

Maybe someday Raz will get over Benghazi

[The Brain]

No, I don't think I'll ever get over Macho Grande.

[Razgovory]

No, you were going off on conspiracy theories of your own.

And that has what exactly to do with Monsanto, Halliburton, or the Boston Bombing? I am trying to find the connection you are drawing between murder/destruction conspiracies and the cover up over Benghazi.

Cause they are both murder/destruction conspiracies.   Are you really this stupid, or is it an act?

[katmai]

No, I don't think I'll ever get over Macho Grande.

[Sheilbh]

You know what would be funny?  If the case against him was thrown out of court 'cause he wasn't Mirandized, so they just let him go--by turning him loose in downtown Boston after giving the public plenty of notice about when and where he was going to be released.

Wouldn't it just make evidence they gained from interviewing him inadmissible?

Oh, and civil libertarians

[Viking]

You know what would be funny?  If the case against him was thrown out of court 'cause he wasn't Mirandized, so they just let him go--by turning him loose in downtown Boston after giving the public plenty of notice about when and where he was going to be released.

Wouldn't it just make evidence they gained from interviewing him inadmissible?

Oh, and civil libertarians

stupid, wouldn't it be better to follow the forms and give him his miranda rights, he's watched tv so he knows them anyways and then abuse the intention of the law screwing him over legally in the way experienced cops and lawyers can to the max?

Then again, we did get this kind of spiteful petty abuse with Breivik as well. The main difference? Judges here are civil servants and employees of the justice department and easily bullied.

[CountDeMoney]

Well, the fucker's been shot straight through the throat, so he's not talking anyway.

[Sheilbh]

stupid, wouldn't it be better to follow the forms and give him his miranda rights, he's watched tv so he knows them anyways and then abuse the intention of the law screwing him over legally in the way experienced cops and lawyers can to the max?

As CdM says he's not talking anyway and as you say the contexts different now. Anyone who's seen a cop procedural knows about the Miranda warning, which is great.

But in general I think forms should be flexible as long as principles are upheld - he still has those rights, he's not being mistreated and so on - especially in a case, like this, where I think there is a legitimate public safety issue. You capture a suspected terrorist, more or less red handed, the first priority shouldn't be building the case against them but discovering if there's another bomb and where (assuming there's some evidence there could be). It's like walking into an armed robbery and you capture one of the robbers, police should be able to ask where the other suspect is/if they're armed etc before they read the rights.

Obviously, as I say, that doesn't mean they should be mistreated or anything like that.

[Viking]

stupid, wouldn't it be better to follow the forms and give him his miranda rights, he's watched tv so he knows them anyways and then abuse the intention of the law screwing him over legally in the way experienced cops and lawyers can to the max?

As CdM says he's not talking anyway and as you say the contexts different now. Anyone who's seen a cop procedural knows about the Miranda warning, which is great.

But in general I think forms should be flexible as long as principles are upheld - he still has those rights, he's not being mistreated and so on - especially in a case, like this, where I think there is a legitimate public safety issue. You capture a suspected terrorist, more or less red handed, the first priority shouldn't be building the case against them but discovering if there's another bomb and where (assuming there's some evidence there could be). It's like walking into an armed robbery and you capture one of the robbers, police should be able to ask where the other suspect is/if they're armed etc before they read the rights.

Obviously, as I say, that doesn't mean they should be mistreated or anything like that.

I hate to bring this up... but that argument also works on torture and the ticking bomb scenario.

[Sheilbh]

Well it doesn't. Torture's an issue of principle, not form. I don't agree with stripping him of his rights to a lawyer, or right to silence. But I think in a situation where there could be a ticking bomb, or another bomber/robber, the police should be able to ask about that before following form and telling someone about their rights. Which doesn't mean they don't have those rights and ultimately may not help, but reciting the rights certainly won't and in that context is wasting time.

[CountDeMoney]

But I think in a situation where there could be a ticking bomb, or another bomber/robber, the police should be able to ask about that before following form and telling someone about their rights. Which doesn't mean they don't have those rights and ultimately may not help, but reciting the rights certainly won't and in that context is wasting time.

I believe it was determined with relative certainty that particular protocol wasn't necessary in this case.

During the manhunt, the suspects tossed what explosive devices they had in the middle of the chase, their vehicle was recovered, their apartment had been raided and secured in the meantime, and the remaining suspect was not in a position to pose any additional threat once he was flashbang spammed to hell and back and taken into custody.

Reading his rights takes only time and effort, and does not impede the investigation in any way.  The "public safety exemption" is for substantially narrower time frames than this, when time is truly of the essence, e.g., a bomb threat is made, the threatening suspect apprehended before the bomb is located, etc.

[Sheilbh]

During the manhunt, the suspects tossed what explosive devices they had in the middle of the chase, their vehicle was recovered, their apartment had been raided and secured in the meantime, and the remaining suspect was not in a position to pose any additional threat once he was flashbang spammed to hell and back and taken into custody.

Yeah. I wasn't following the chase too closely but I'd thought there were suspicions of other devices. My initial thought on this was how the guy who looked unconscious and half dead on the floor could have been read his rights or asked questions?

A question for you and other Americans, how much of the Miranda does a suspect need to be able to understand? Is it just a formal thing, or do they have to be, you know, conscious and reasonably coherent?

Reading his rights takes only time and effort, and does not impede the investigation in any way.  The "public safety exemption" is for substantially narrower time frames than this, when time is truly of the essence, e.g., a bomb threat is made, the threatening suspect apprehended before the bomb is located, etc.

I'd agree with all of that.

[CountDeMoney]

A question for you and other Americans, how much of the Miranda does a suspect need to be able to understand? Is it just a formal thing, or do they have to be, you know, conscious and reasonably coherent?

He has to be able to acknowledge it.  That's why you ask him at the end if he understands.

[Sheilbh]

What about language difficulties?

[CountDeMoney]

My Miranda card had a flip side en Español

But translation services are easy enough to get through dispatch via the court system.