Anyone have a link that proves that Dzhokar Tsarnaev WAS NOT read his Miranda rights?

[UnrepentantLiberal]

This is very disturbing if true.

[vanlassie]

1. I was reading your post as it was being stated

by Alex on MSNBC. That the government was invoking a 48 hour Public Safety rule

[UnrepentantLiberal]

2. Does this mean he doesn't get a lawyer either?

[vanlassie]

4. Hmm. Don't know. I imagine they will fill him full

Of sodium pentathol and question away! Kidding.

[geckosfeet]

3. I don't think he was in any condition to understand them when he was apprehended.

He was weakened from blood loss from a previous encounter, had nothing to eat or drink for about 24hrs. He was taken to a local hospital after being checked over for explosives etc.

He remains hospitalized and you can be sure that he will be given every legal and medical courtesy.

The Hunt for the Boston Bombing Suspects

2nd Bombing Suspect Caught After Frenzied Hunt Paralyzes Boston

A federal law enforcement official said he would not be read his Miranda rights, because the authorities would be invoking the public safety exception in order to question him extensively about other potential explosive devices or accomplices and to try to gain intelligence.

Justice official says no reading of Miranda rights for Boston suspect

[BeyondGeography]

5. "The Miranda exception exists to protect the public from another attack."

http://t.mediaite.com/mediaite/#!/entry/second-marathon-bombing-suspect-was-not-read-miranda-rights-due,5171fac14ca7a1dba6cd41d2/1

[onenote]

6. Public Safety Exception

Its been part of the Miranda rule for nearly 30 years (the Quarles case in 1984). It provides that law enforcement can engage in non-coercive questioning of someone they have in custody without informing them of their right not to respond (and their right to counsel) if the questions are "focused and limited" to matters of which the officers became aware before the arrest and that are necessary for the police "to secure their own safety or the safety of the public." Thus, law enforcement can, under this exception, ask Tsarnaev about the location of any explosives or weapons that he left behind. He also could be asked about other co-conspirators or accomplices. If he answers (and he is not compelled to do so) that information could be used against him. OF course, in this instance, there is such a wealth of other evidence against Tsarnaev that it is highly unlikely that anything he says would be necessary to obtain a conviction against him on a wide wide range of charges including murder and/or conspiracy to commit murder.

[BlueStreak]

8. But abuse of this exception -- and this is abusive -- could lead to acquittal

Using that exception in this case is a complete crock other than one question: "Are there any other bombs that we have not discovered?"

Other than that, no police officer and no member of the public is in any immediate danger that requires police state tactics.

And let's remember what Miranda is.

It says he has a right to have an attorney present during questioning and that one will be provided if he can't afford it. And it says that what he says can be included as evidence.

And that latter point is EXACTLY why they should read him his rights. If he incriminates himself without getting his rights, he could make a defense based on no legitimate use of the Miranda exception, and that could possibly lead to acquittal.

Why are we so afraid of our system of laws?

[ananda]

9. Do you think it's abuse of rights in this case?

I'm not so sure.

My big question is this. What will they be able to get out of this
very disturbed boy once he's able to be questioned?

My gut tells me: not much. But you never know ...

[UnrepentantLiberal]

12. And THAT is where they will be abusing the exception.

The ONLY reason they should be using it is to find bombs that are SET TO EXPLODE SOON, not to gather information on a terrorist network. Does anyone doubt they'll be using it to do the latter?

Obama is really giving Bush a run for his money.

[onenote]

11. even assuming it was abused

and at this point that would just be an assumption, I can't see how it would lead to an acquittal in this case. Care to elaborate?

Also, here are some other questions that he could be asked that wouldn't strike me as falling outside the normal parameters of the exception:

Are there more weapons store anywhere? Where are they? Are there others involved in the actions you take and do you know of any specific plans or timetable for similar actions or other acts of violence against the public?

[BlueStreak]

47. Failure to provide Miranda rights has often resulted in acquittal

But that was the old days when America actually gave a shit about Constitutional Rights.

What is wrong with giving his his rights and then questioning him? He is either going to talk or he isn't. A good lawyer would work a deal where he gets life in prison instead of death penalty if he cooperates.

Besides, I think what we will find out is that these two basically were just crazy.

Did we give Miranda Rights to Jason Loughner?

Remember, any decisions they justify in this case become more precedent for even more abuses in the future.

[onenote]

48. failure to give miranda rights doesn't directly result in acquittal

It results in the exclusion of the statements made by the accused prior to being mirandized.

Again, do you think the only way this guy can be convicted is if he says something incriminating, that in effect, if he keeps his mount shut, the prosecution will be unable to convict him of any number of a long list of crimes with which he's going to be charged?

The fact that there are cases in which someone who might not be convicted but for their own statements will be acquitted if those statements are excluded has zero relevance to the instant case, imo.

As for Loughner, I don't know whether or when he was informed of his Miranda rights. From what I recall, he almost immediately upon being grabbed started saying "I plead the Fifth" and he refused to answer any questions. But given that he elected to plead guilty, even though he made no statements to the police, how does that example fit the idea that not Mirandizing him would have led to his acquittal?

[BlueStreak]

52. It possibly excludes any evidence developed from this point forward

I agree that they probably have enough evidence to convict him for a life term if they can prove he shot the MIT cop.

But why not use the judicial system? Why use police state tactics?

The risk of doing it this was is that his spills his guts about everything and then can argue that almost anything presented by the prosecution is tainted by a Miranda violation. It seems like a foolish and completely unnecessary move. It is just a bunch of dicks trying to get vengeance. That is not the way to pursue justice.

[onenote]

53. Not likely

If he makes statements without being mirandized in response to questions about matters of concern to public safety, such as questions about whether there are weapons or explosives stashed somewhere, those statements are admissible as is any evidence discovered as a result of those statements. Statements about whether there are accomplices still at large also probably fit within the public safety exception

If he is asked about matters unrelated to public safety, they could be excluded as might evidence developed based on those statements. But I honestly don't think that the ability to convict this guy of a host of criminal offenses would turn on any statements he might make or evidence developed as a result of those statements (as contrasted with evidence now in the possession of authorities or discoverable without reliance on anything he might say).

On balance, questioning him about potential threats to public safety outweighs the miniscule risk that he might be convicted of only 140 counts of murder and maiming instead of 140 counts of murder and maiming and one count of mail fraud or something.

[GodlessBiker]

15. I think there are many other questions that would fall within the exception.

Were you working with others in making bombs?
Who are they?
Where are they?
Might they have made their own bombs?
Who would know who everyone who was working on this?
Where did you get your bomb materials?

In other words, any question which reveal those involved, their plans, the sources if materials, etc., as this might be on ongoing conspiracy which could produce more bombs.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

18. Arr you being sarcastic?

Those DO NOT fall within the exception AT ALL.

[Jersey Devil]

32. violation of Miranda Rule does not lead to acquittal

All it would do if the courts ruled his Miranda rights were violated would be to prevent his statements (and anything that arose out of his statements) from being used against him at trial.

All other evidence gained independently of his statements could still be used, and in this case there is plenty.

[KittyWampus]

45. NO it could not. You have no idea what you are talking about. There is more than enough evidence to

convict him without needing anything he said in the next 48 hours.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

7. That wasn't hard to find.

I guess I should have looked before I asked. Any problem with this from the Obama worshipers?

http://espn.go.com/boston/story/_/id/9191817/dzhokhar-tsarnaev-second-boston-marathon-bombing-suspect-custody

A Justice Department official said Dzhokhar Tsarnaev will not be read his Miranda rights because the government is invoking a public safety exception.

That official and a second person briefed on the investigation said the 19-year-old will be questioned by a special interrogation team for high-value suspects. The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to disclose the information publicly.

The public safety exception permits law enforcement officials to engage in a limited and focused unwarned interrogation of a suspect and allows the government to introduce the statement as evidence in court. The public safety exception is triggered when police officers have an objectively reasonable need to protect the police or the public from immediate danger.

[OKNancy]

10. I have a few questions

1. Why would the supporters of the President have a problem, do you?
2. Why did you use the phrase "Obama worshipers"? was it to stir up things?
3. Do you miss your favorite place to shit-stir, META?

[UnrepentantLiberal]

14. You don't have a problem with a Democratic president abusing the Miranda exception?

[OKNancy]

21. The public safety exception has been in effect since 1984

If they want to ask him if there are any other planted bombs around Boston before telling him he doesn't have to answer if he doesn't want to, doesn't bother me. The ruling doesn't last forever either.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

25. Would it bother you if you found out that

they had asked him about terrorist networks while they were interrogating asking him about other bombs he may have left behind?

[avebury]

20. I support Obama and I have a problem

with denying any suspect his/her Constitutional and Miranda rights. Society cannot pick and choose which rights to grant a citizen and when to deny a person his/her rights. These rights are especially for the tough times and the tough cases when it would be so easy for the masses to spiral into a mob mentality. We live in a civil society and how we treat the worst amongst us dictates whether we have a free society, a dictatorship, or a banana republic. Denying any defendant his/her rights taints the judicial process and raises a lot of questions about a Prosecutor's case.

[BeyondGeography]

19. Why didn't you just start a thread called, "I don't like Obama"?

[UnrepentantLiberal]

23. Why don't you start a thread called

"Obama can do whatever he wants".

This really is little more than a football game. As long as your team wins you don't care what they do.

[randome]

28. If the authorities are being upfront with us about the Miranda rights...

...what makes you think they are trying to 'pull one over' on us? I mean, if they are as nefarious as you seem to want to believe, why would they not simply say they read him his rights and be done with it?

The answer is: they have been doing this by the book and continue to do so.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

36. Why don't I trust them?

Why don't I trust them?

The CIA's Secret Sites in Somalia

Jeremy Scahill
The Nation
July 12, 2011

Nestled in a back corner of Mogadishu’s Aden Adde International Airport is a sprawling walled compound run by the Central Intelligence Agency. Set on the coast of the Indian Ocean, the facility looks like a small gated community, with more than a dozen buildings behind large protective walls and secured by guard towers at each of its four corners. Adjacent to the compound are eight large metal hangars, and the CIA has its own aircraft at the airport. The site, which airport officials and Somali intelligence sources say was completed four months ago, is guarded by Somali soldiers, but the Americans control access. At the facility, the CIA runs a counterterrorism training program for Somali intelligence agents and operatives aimed at building an indigenous strike force capable of snatch operations and targeted “combat” operations against members of Al Shabab, an Islamic militant group with close ties to Al Qaeda.

As part of its expanding counterterrorism program in Somalia, the CIA also uses a secret prison buried in the basement of Somalia’s National Security Agency (NSA) headquarters, where prisoners suspected of being Shabab members or of having links to the group are held. Some of the prisoners have been snatched off the streets of Kenya and rendered by plane to Mogadishu. While the underground prison is officially run by the Somali NSA, US intelligence personnel pay the salaries of intelligence agents and also directly interrogate prisoners. The existence of both facilities and the CIA role was uncovered by The Nation during an extensive on-the-ground investigation in Mogadishu. Among the sources who provided information for this story are senior Somali intelligence officials; senior members of Somalia’s Transitional Federal Government (TFG); former prisoners held at the underground prison; and several well-connected Somali analysts and militia leaders, some of whom have worked with US agents, including those from the CIA. A US official, who confirmed the existence of both sites, told The Nation , “It makes complete sense to have a strong counterterrorism partnership” with the Somali government.

The CIA presence in Mogadishu is part of Washington’s intensifying counterterrorism focus on Somalia, which includes targeted strikes by US Special Operations forces, drone attacks and expanded surveillance operations. The US agents “are here full time,” a senior Somali intelligence official told me. At times, he said, there are as many as thirty of them in Mogadishu, but he stressed that those working with the Somali NSA do not conduct operations; rather, they advise and train Somali agents. “In this environment, it’s very tricky. They want to help us, but the situation is not allowing them to do [it] however they want. They are not in control of the politics, they are not in control of the security,” he adds. “They are not controlling the environment like Afghanistan and Iraq. In Somalia, the situation is fluid, the situation is changing, personalities changing.”

According to well-connected Somali sources, the CIA is reluctant to deal directly with Somali political leaders, who are regarded by US officials as corrupt and untrustworthy. Instead, the United States has Somali intelligence agents on its payroll. Somali sources with knowledge of the program described the agents as lining up to receive $200 monthly cash payments from Americans. “They support us in a big way financially,” says the senior Somali intelligence official. “They are the largest [funder] by far.”

According to former detainees, the underground prison, which is staffed by Somali guards, consists of a long corridor lined with filthy small cells infested with bedbugs and mosquitoes. One said that when he arrived in February, he saw two white men wearing military boots, combat trousers, gray tucked-in shirts and black sunglasses. The former prisoners described the cells as windowless and the air thick, moist and disgusting. Prisoners, they said, are not allowed outside. Many have developed rashes and scratch themselves incessantly. Some have been detained for a year or more. According to one former prisoner, inmates who had been there for long periods would pace around constantly, while others leaned against walls rocking.

More: http://www.thenation.com/article/161936/cias-secret-sites-somalia

[randome]

43. I'm not sure what the CIA has to do with Boston cops and Boston prosecutors.

If you think someone's rights are being violated, I suggest contacting the ACLU. Otherwise, you are speculating about the procedures used by a group of LEOs that has followed the book all along on this case.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

46. It's the book being changed that is the problem.

I don't know why you would even pretend to not recognise this disasterous erosion of our values. It amazes me how right Machiavelli really was.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maher_Arar

Maher Arar was detained during a layover at John F. Kennedy International Airport in September 2002 on his way home to Canada from a family vacation in Tunis. He was held without charges in solitary confinement in the United States for nearly two weeks, questioned, and denied meaningful access to a lawyer. The US government suspected him of being a member of Al Qaeda and deported him, not to Canada, his current home and the passport on which he was travelling, but to Syria, even though its government is known to use torture. [6] He was detained in Syria for almost a year, during which time he was tortured, according to the findings of a commission of inquiry ordered by the Canadian government, until his release to Canada. The Syrian government later stated that Arar was "completely innocent." [7][8] A Canadian commission publicly cleared Arar of any links to terrorism, and the government of Canada later settled out of court with Arar. He received C$10.5 million and prime minister Stephen Harper formally apologized to Arar for Canada's role in his "terrible ordeal". [9][10]

As of December 2011, Arar and his family remained on the US No Fly List. [11] His US lawyers at the Center for Constitutional Rights are currently pursuing his case, Arar v. Ashcroft, which seeks compensatory damages on Arar’s behalf and also a declaration that the actions of the US government were illegal and violated his constitutional, civil, and international human rights.

[muriel_volestrangler]

29. Are you concerned that you are on the anti-Obama team? (nt)

[DrDan]

33. I thought the "with us or against us" behavior was behind us

guess I was mistaken

[UnrepentantLiberal]

35. You were mistaken.

It increased ten fold when Obama offered to cut Social Security and home heating benefits to pay for tax cuts and military spending.

[muriel_volestrangler]

37. Yeah, so did I, until UnrepentantLiberal brought it back up

with "As long as your team wins you don't care what they do". And "Obama worshippers". It's pretty divisive posting that UL is doing, isn't it?

[DrDan]

39. "anti-Obama team" isn't helping the divisiveness, is it?

[muriel_volestrangler]

40. Since they talked about "Obama worshippers" and "your team"

it seems to only way to talk to them that they'll understand. I could ignore this thread totally, since it's pretty pointless. Shall we both do that, so that we don't encourage UL any further?

[UnrepentantLiberal]

42. Don't worry about me.

Worry about what is going to happen in 2014. You'll blame it on me but you'll know in your heart of hearts it was the result of Obama offering to cut Social Security.

[muriel_volestrangler]

44. You write that after saying "I won't respond to nonsense and non sequiturs"

Wow, you call a post discussing the terms you use in the thread a non sequitur; and then turn around and start talking about the 2014 election and social security, in a thread about the Boston killings?

Do you ever think about what you've written in a thread, at all?

[UnrepentantLiberal]

34. I'm on the anti-right wing authoritarian team.

I was very much on the Obama team in 07, 08 and 09. When he was running for office I thought he was going to be one of the United States' best presidents. I was on cloud nine when he was elected in 2008. I was an Obama apologist in 2009. I gave up on that when I realized he was a BIG TIME DLC/Third Way Democrat. Yes, the Democratic Party isn't quite as bad as the Republican Party (that's why I voted for Obama last year), but for the last 20 years BOTH have been conservative parties that have handed this country over to corporations.

[muriel_volestrangler]

38. So you regard public safety as a team game

and you see anyone who thinks that using a Supreme Court decision that allows the questioning of a suspect about other possible bombs before reading the Miranda rights as an "Obama worshipper", so Not On Your Team.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

41. I'll tell you what I won't do.

I won't respond to nonsense and non sequiturs.

[BlueStreak]

49. And considering that the suspect is in custody, the only possible threats would be

1) Additional bombs not yet exploded

2) Accomplices that are intending to carry on with the bombings.

That's a 5 minute interrogation. And I fail to see why getting a court-appointed lawyer causes any hardship on the government. In fact, a good attorney would recommend that the boy cooperate, at least on these public safety matters.

Look, if Lynsey Graham is recommending that we not use our judicial system, that alone is a good reason to question that plan.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

50. Not to mention that since torture and the abuse of

our judicial system has resulted in no useful information, the only reason to still do it is to act like a tough guy for political reasons.

[no_hypocrisy]

13. Couldn't the same result be attained by

a guarantee of immunity against prosecution for information about hidden bombs, etc. in addition to Miranda Rights?

[dems_rightnow]

16. You want to grant him immunity?

Seriously?

[no_hypocrisy]

22. Not total immunity. Just not to be prosecuted for that particular action(s).

[dems_rightnow]

24. What's the purpose

"We promise not to seek a second death penalty."

[no_hypocrisy]

27. The prosecutors can "afford" to give limited immunity for one or two of these charges.

They'd have more than enough charges to prosecute and convict. The extra charges of planting additional devices that didn't go off wouldn't be needed for a conviction and the information would help law enforcement neutralize the devices.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

17. The only thing they would do is take the death penalty off the table.

I doubt they'll do that.

[Jersey Devil]

30. Mirandized or not, he can still refuse to answer questions

The public safety exception to the Miranda Rule means they can delay reading his rights to him. It does not mean he can be forced to answer questions if he does not want to. He can still refuse to talk and they cannot force him to do so involunarily. Of course they have a team that is probably very persuasive, but they cannot use force.

[randome]

31. You mean to prove a negative? No.

[DirkGently]

51. Here are a couple.

WASHINGTON -- A Justice Department official says the Boston Marathon bombing suspect will not be read his Miranda rights because the government is invoking a public safety exception.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/19/miranda-rights-boston-bombing-suspect_n_3120333.html

Obama administration withholds suspect’s Miranda rights–for now
Meredith Clark, @MeredithLClark
11:20 AM on 04/20/2013
Twitter72
Facebook150
8

Updated at 12:20 PM
More than 12 hours after Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was taken into custody, authorities have yet to read the 19-year-old Boston bombing suspect his Miranda rights.
President Obama said of the investigation Friday night that “it’s important that we do this right.” But Tsarnaev will not be advised of his right to remain silent or his right to counsel before authorities begin questioning him. While this is not the first time the government has invoked what is known as the public safety exception to Miranda, the Boston case will be an important test of the limits of civil liberties and the legal system.

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/04/20/bombing-suspect-in-custody-but-obama-administration-withholds-miranda-rights-for-now/