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

Special “public safety” powers

Whitewing

Well-known member
:???:

Investigators will interrogate the bomber, still seriously ill last night, without reading him his rights – using special “public safety” powers.

When I first heard that they'd not read him his Miranda Rights because of special "public safety" powers, I thought that meant at the time of his arrest.

But I guess it means you read him his rights when you see fit. Carry on, situation normal.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Whitewing said:
:???:

Investigators will interrogate the bomber, still seriously ill last night, without reading him his rights – using special “public safety” powers.

When I first heard that they'd not read him his Miranda Rights because of special "public safety" powers, I thought that meant at the time of his arrest.

But I guess it means you read him his rights when you see fit. Carry on, situation normal.

He'll be informed of his rights when he is healthy enough to be arraigned- and understand them and the happenings...

Up til then under the public safety exception they do not have to give him Miranda rights- BUT it is still unclear if not doing so would mean any statements he gives could not be used at his trial.... My personal belief is how big of a "public safety" issue you are looking at- and how "imminent" it may be would be the deciding factor...

If you ever talk much with an attorney- the number one comment they hear from clients is "they didn't read me my rights- so can you get me off?" And normally the answer is "NO".

Wrongly- many uniformed individuals think that if you are not given your Miranda rights when arrested that you're rights have been violated and charges will have to be dropped and you should win your case....WRONG--Actually all it means is that possibly any statements/confessions you make may not be used against in a trial... Nothing more... All other evidence can be used...
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
The Miranda Rights I understand, but thanks anyway for the detail.

It's the "special public safety powers" thingy that I don't understand. I can imagine all sorts of situations where it might be unwise or almost impossible from a safety standpoint to read a guy his rights at the time of his arrest.

However, once he's in custody and the danger surrounding his arrest has passed, why not read him his rights? Why risk compromising information that might later not be useable in court because of the failure to read him his rights?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Whitewing said:
The Miranda Rights I understand, but thanks anyway for the detail.

It's the "special public safety powers" thingy that I don't understand. I can imagine all sorts of situations where it might be unwise or almost impossible from a safety standpoint to read a guy his rights at the time of his arrest.

However, once he's in custody and the danger surrounding his arrest has passed, why not read him his rights? Why risk compromising information that might later not be useable in court because of the failure to read him his rights?

I agree- the world is watching- so read him his rights- and show him that our constitution and rights don't falter for any criminal proceeding...

I remember when I was first told about the public safety exception- and they used examples like you catch the guy and know he still has a bomb set in a building or a kidnapper that you believe may have a victim hidden away or buried alive... Law professors said that on a case by case issue- the courts may still allow any statements made to be used in court even with no Miranda...

After the imminent issue passes- I don't think they will stand up in court...
The question now is what is the definition of "imminent" in the world of international terrorism.......
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
My understanding is that the "public safety exception", can also apply to "intel". If they were working with others etc, they may want to gather as much intel., before reading him his rights and providing a lawyer.
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Whitewing said:
The Miranda Rights I understand, but thanks anyway for the detail.

It's the "special public safety powers" thingy that I don't understand. I can imagine all sorts of situations where it might be unwise or almost impossible from a safety standpoint to read a guy his rights at the time of his arrest.

However, once he's in custody and the danger surrounding his arrest has passed, why not read him his rights? Why risk compromising information that might later not be useable in court because of the failure to read him his rights?

I agree- the world is watching- so read him his rights- and show him that our constitution and rights don't falter for any criminal proceeding...

I remember when I was first told about the public safety exception- and they used examples like you catch the guy and know he still has a bomb set in a building or a kidnapper that you believe may have a victim hidden away or buried alive... Law professors said that on a case by case issue- the courts may still allow any statements made to be used in court even with no Miranda...

After the imminent issue passes- I don't think they will stand up in court...
The question now is what is the definition of "imminent" in the world of international terrorism.......

Well, let's face it, in the world of international terrorism, these two are not exactly an Osama bin Laden or a Mohammed Atta in the overall scheme of things. Just how much could they know about other events?

At 26 and 19 years of age, they managed to kill a few innocents and shut down a major US city for 24 hours or so, but their methods and follow through were amazingly crude. A suicide bombing would have been much more effective and probably much more terrorizing in general.

The risk that their bombs would be discovered in unattended bags was great, and frankly, someone dropped the ball in that regard. Also, they apparently had no escape plan whatsoever.

I say read the little bitch his rights so that some hotshot attorney can't game the system on his behalf and then let him go through the process. He needs to be fried though it's likely in good ole' liberal MA there is no death penalty.
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
My understanding is that the "public safety exception", can also apply to "intel". If they were working with others etc, they may want to gather as much intel., before reading him his rights and providing a lawyer.

I understand that aspect as well. But we're talking now about a police action and criminal investigation, not a military action. I assume the guy is an American citizen with all the rights that come along with it. My advice would be to go by the book or risk the consequences of a continued loss of Constitutional rights.

PS - Should have gathered the intel when the Ruskies told US law enforcement that the guy was a threat.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Whitewing said:
hypocritexposer said:
My understanding is that the "public safety exception", can also apply to "intel". If they were working with others etc, they may want to gather as much intel., before reading him his rights and providing a lawyer.

I understand that aspect as well. But we're talking now about a police action and criminal investigation, not a military action. I assume the guy is an American citizen with all the rights that come along with it. My advice would be to go by the book or risk the consequences of a continued loss of Constitutional rights.

PS - Should have gathered the intel when the Ruskies told US law enforcement that the guy was a threat.

obama has taken your advice under advisement, and cares very deeply about an American's Constitutional rights....




:lol: :lol:
 

Mike

Well-known member
He needs to be fried though it's likely in good ole' liberal MA there is no death penalty.

The Federal Death Penalty is still in effect. It won't go to Massachusetts "State" Court.
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Mike said:
He needs to be fried though it's likely in good ole' liberal MA there is no death penalty.

The Federal Death Penalty is still in effect. It won't go to Massachusetts "State" Court.

Mike, when's the last time they executed someone up there? Willy Horton? :lol:

BTW, on the Miranda piece you posted, what's that saying about giving up one's rights in order to have security? :wink:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Whitewing said:
Mike said:
He needs to be fried though it's likely in good ole' liberal MA there is no death penalty.

The Federal Death Penalty is still in effect. It won't go to Massachusetts "State" Court.

Mike, when's the last time they executed someone up there? Willy Horton? :lol:

BTW, on the piece you posted, what's that saying about giving up one's rights in order to have security? :wink:

I believe I heard that the last person convicted and executed under the Federal Statutes was Timothy McVeigh for the Oklahoma City Bombings...

On August 10, 1995, McVeigh was indicted on 11 federal counts, including conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction, use of a weapon of mass destruction, destruction by explosives and eight counts of first-degree murder...
--------------
On June 2, 1997, McVeigh was found guilty on all 11 counts of the federal indictment.
------------------------
McVeigh was executed by lethal injection at 7:14 a.m. on June 11, 2001, at the U.S. Federal Penitentiary in Terre Haute, Indiana, the first federal prisoner to be executed by the United States federal government since Victor Feguer was executed in Iowa on March 15, 1963.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Whitewing said:
Mike said:
He needs to be fried though it's likely in good ole' liberal MA there is no death penalty.

The Federal Death Penalty is still in effect. It won't go to Massachusetts "State" Court.

Mike, when's the last time they executed someone up there? Willy Horton? :lol:

BTW, on the Miranda piece you posted, what's that saying about giving up one's rights in order to have security? :wink:

They persecuted Mitt Romney................

Correct on Miranda.
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Whitewing said:
Mike said:
The Federal Death Penalty is still in effect. It won't go to Massachusetts "State" Court.

Mike, when's the last time they executed someone up there? Willy Horton? :lol:

BTW, on the piece you posted, what's that saying about giving up one's rights in order to have security? :wink:

I believe I heard that the last person convicted and executed under the Federal Statutes was Timothy McVeigh for the Oklahoma City Bombings...

On August 10, 1995, McVeigh was indicted on 11 federal counts, including conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction, use of a weapon of mass destruction, destruction by explosives and eight counts of first-degree murder...
--------------
On June 2, 1997, McVeigh was found guilty on all 11 counts of the federal indictment.
------------------------
McVeigh was executed by lethal injection at 7:14 a.m. on June 11, 2001, at the U.S. Federal Penitentiary in Terre Haute, Indiana, the first federal prisoner to be executed by the United States federal government since Victor Feguer was executed in Iowa on March 15, 1963.

Yes, we know, the founder of the Tea Party Movement. :roll:

Massachusetts, numbnut, the last person the state executed.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Whitewing said:
Oldtimer said:
Whitewing said:
Mike, when's the last time they executed someone up there? Willy Horton? :lol:

BTW, on the piece you posted, what's that saying about giving up one's rights in order to have security? :wink:

I believe I heard that the last person convicted and executed under the Federal Statutes was Timothy McVeigh for the Oklahoma City Bombings...

On August 10, 1995, McVeigh was indicted on 11 federal counts, including conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction, use of a weapon of mass destruction, destruction by explosives and eight counts of first-degree murder...
--------------
On June 2, 1997, McVeigh was found guilty on all 11 counts of the federal indictment.
------------------------
McVeigh was executed by lethal injection at 7:14 a.m. on June 11, 2001, at the U.S. Federal Penitentiary in Terre Haute, Indiana, the first federal prisoner to be executed by the United States federal government since Victor Feguer was executed in Iowa on March 15, 1963.

Yes, we know, the founder of the Tea Party Movement. :roll:

Massachusetts, numbnut, the last person the state executed.

Don't talk to "Fatlock" like that. :lol: :lol:

You'll give him a complex. Or is it simplex?
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
Victor Feguer's last meal.
victorfeguer.jpg
 

Latest posts

Top