I think the ACLU should stay the ---- out of it and let the experts make the decision.
We need to obtain as much information as legally possible first.
5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
No. Maybe later.
That idiot Romero and the ACLU makes the statement:
"Every criminal defendant has a right to be brought before a judge and to have access to counsel. We must not waver from our tried-and-true justice system, even in the most difficult of times," Romero said."
Getting ahead of themselves as usual just to stir the bleeding hearts.
First, he isn't a criminal defendant...YET. Hasn't been charged with anything...YET. Right now, he is just being detained for questioning. And he happens to be laid up in a hospital under the influence of drugs. They could read him his rights and it wouldn't make a difference. He has to understand those rights and I doubt seriously he would at this point.
And to make it even better...he is being held "Under the Law of War" they can hold this suspect as a potential enemy combatant not entitled to Miranda warnings or the appointment of counsel."
7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
So if the ACLU wants to pout over this, then they need to work on changing the law of war because as it stands now...it's tough luck!
8 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Great post ladybug...I agree!
3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
A liberal telling liberals to stay out...ladybug, you may be catching on.
4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
As far as when...follow the law.
With the NDAA he gets nothing. Waterboard and send to gitmo. This is our Pres in action. ACLU can go pound sand. Every once in a while the blind squirrel finds a nut. The libs don't like what the libs made law? Tough.
This isn't about libs,moderates,dems ,repubs .
It's about about getting facts ,answers and hopefully keep it from happening again.
The rest of you can play your name game BS,
2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
I try and make decisions passed on the best results ,the rest of you seem more intent on playing the other game.
This is exactly why washington is a total failure all the way around.
3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Sorry " based " I've watched the news today and their already starting to play the grand stand game.
This politician says this,that says that,One want a investagation already. The news channels are just as bad,Anything to get a story.
Some had the guy arrested before they even new who he was.
2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
The Pres. has made no decision yet.
To set there and start your BS is just that swager.
No miranda the decision has been made, sorry for your lack of attention
4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
What does marandia have to do with wateboarding and send to gitmo ?
1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
The sooner they read him his rights ,the sooner they won't be able to question him without a lawyer present.
If the suspect is determined to be an enemy combatant (rather than a criminal offender) then Miranda does not come into play. If he is determined to be a criminal offender then Miranda only comes into play when being questioned about the crime(s). Hollywood has most people believe that a criminal offender MUST be mirandized at the time of arrest....not true at all.
With all of the eyewitnesses involved, particularly at the shootout with police, he could easily be tried and convicted of those crimes without ever being questioned (or mirandized) and the seriousness of those crimes alone would ensure that he would never be free again.
3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Of course, we need more information on who else might be involved, who may have helped them, etc., so he will have to be questioned. However, if it is later determined that he should have been mirandized and he wasn't, then the probable outcome will be that law enforcement got the wanted information but his answers to the questions will be suppressed at trial...No big deal. As stated, there are plenty of eye witnesses to secure convictions.
No --------As I understand, since their is sufficient evidence to convict now it becomes unnecessary to advise him that anything he says may be used against himself.
Wrong. As an american citizen they have 72 hrs to charge him and advise of his rights.
0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Don't you think all the sensationalizing of these type incidents are adding to the occurrence of them? Like in this case hour after hour of news media coverage pumping into people's minds, wacko's included, that this one "suspect" could practically shut down a whole city and gained national attention. For what purpose? To satisfy our society's thirst for blood? Is this what our nation has come to? Do you not think that it may encourage some mentally unstable person to get their moment of fame too. Causing more and more of these incidents. Another thing that bothers me is,even reading some of the remarks on here shows that the news media has this kid found guilty and convicted already in the publics mind and he has not ever gone thru the legal process,which our constitution states is how we operate in this country. Has the news media become our legal system and public opinion the court system? Do you think they will sit a jury who can be objective in this case?
Ant information they obtain in the mean can't be used against him.Thats why they need all this extra evidance
0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
The news media is only interested in getting a story.Even if they don't have the facts.
If you think this is bad you should have been watching the reporting during the newtown slayings.
Well, said I was done but I have to comment on this.
He IS a citizen. Period. Therefore they should read him his RIGHTS. Because as a citizen he has those rights. Our rights are not situational. There is nothing to be gained by not reading them, plenty to be lost though. As if they need anything he might say to convict him...
4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Grant you are 100% correct. If we ever get away from the innocent until proven guilty (in a court of law)foundation in this country, then we will have crumbled the very foundation of our constitutional freedoms. Let's just let the system work like our founders intended it too. The 5th amendment" No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury" The 6th gives people a right to legal counsel for his defense and trial by an impartial jury from the state where the crime was committed. Again I ask with the media having already tried and convicted this guy can they find an impartial jury?? I think it will be difficult. I think if he is guilty he should pay but he is entitled to the due process of law.
Not being a smart a-- concerned,
But watching yesterdays news,You have several Senators who want him tryed as a enemy compatent,others tryed as a citizen.
You have others who want to start and investigation into the FBI.
Now someone looses and we will never hear the end of it.
And of course you have all the news channels with their big mouths and opinions running a 100 miles/hr
161 North Lincoln , Salem, OH 44460 |