• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

6th Amendment under attack

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
The sixth amendment of the US constitution protects the right of criminal suspects to be "represented by counsel", but the Obama regime argues that this merely means to "protect the adversary process" in a criminal trial.

However, in a current case that seeks to change the law, the US Justice Department argues that the existing rule is unnecessary and outdated.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/5214985/Barack-Obama-administration-seeks-to-change-police-questioning-law.html
 

Steve

Well-known member
Constitution said:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

seems clear enough to me, but then again I am not a trained constitutional lawyer,...

and after reading the article, it is about statements made with out council.. that a defendant is not required to make, .. but does so freely,.. even after being advised of his/her rights..

seems the fifth amendment takes care of that..

Constitution said:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

add in that it irks me as well that criminals get statement thrown out because the person makes a comment in violation of their own constitutional rights..
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Uh-oh, I think I find myself leaning towards Obama on this one. I had better go take a shower quick, I'm feeling so filthy all of a sudden.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
Uh-oh, I think I find myself leaning towards Obama on this one. I had better go take a shower quick, I'm feeling so filthy all of a sudden.


The sixth amendment of the US constitution protects the right of criminal suspects to be "represented by counsel", but the Obama regime argues that this merely means to "protect the adversary process" in a criminal trial.


Yep-- up until about 15-20 years ago-- a person arrested could go into court- make a plea- and even be sentenced to prison if they plead guilty without having an attorney with them- or a public defender assigned to them if they had no attorney...
Many who knew they were guilty did so......

Then the courts/attorneys got carried overboard and almost forced you to have an attorney before you could enter a plea (many Judges require it)- or be sentenced-- and in my belief carried the "right to counsel" way overboard- which cost taxpayers $ Zillions in public defender fees....

Back in the 70's we had a case where the guy sexually assaulted his daughter one night- we were called on it in the early morning hours - arrested the fellow- he appeared before the District Judge that afternoon on the information and belief filed by the County Attorney- pled Guilty- was sentenced- and was on the way to the State Prison that evening......
Now he'd have to sit in Jail (or be out on bail) for months getting an attorney appointed- and going thru Dog and Pony shows before he could even plead guilty.....And the taxpayers would be picking up the cost for each step....
 

Lonecowboy

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
Uh-oh, I think I find myself leaning towards Obama on this one. I had better go take a shower quick, I'm feeling so filthy all of a sudden.


The sixth amendment of the US constitution protects the right of criminal suspects to be "represented by counsel", but the Obama regime argues that this merely means to "protect the adversary process" in a criminal trial.


Yep-- up until about 15-20 years ago-- a person arrested could go into court- make a plea- and even be sentenced to prison if they plead guilty without having an attorney with them- or a public defender assigned to them if they had no attorney...
Many who knew they were guilty did so......

Then the courts/attorneys got carried overboard and almost forced you to have an attorney before you could enter a plea (many Judges require it)- or be sentenced-- and in my belief carried the "right to counsel" way overboard- which cost taxpayers $ Zillions in public defender fees....

Back in the 70's we had a case where the guy sexually assaulted his daughter one night- we were called on it in the early morning hours - arrested the fellow- he appeared before the District Judge that afternoon on the information and belief filed by the County Attorney- pled Guilty- was sentenced- and was on the way to the State Prison that evening......
Now he'd have to sit in Jail (or be out on bail) for months getting an attorney appointed- and going thru Dog and Pony shows before he could even plead guilty.....And the taxpayers would be picking up the cost for each step....

well Barney Fife, why didn't you take the bullet out of your pocket and really save the taxpayers some $$$$$
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Will they still allow for you to have a lawyer present if you ask for one?

Do a google search and this won't show up in many places. Why?

as of now, just the WSJ and a blog, and then there is the UK news that's carrying it!
 
Top