Boston Marathon hit by explosions

[Coito ergo sum]

Well let the rednecks handle it. That'll solve all the problems.

Of course it won't.

But, pretending that appointing some bureau to do it will be effective is also not going to solve all the problems.

[Seth]

You're describing the situation under Bush. Obama is going further, and claiming he can do all this, and still use any information obtained in court due to "exigent circumstances".

Not really. The government can claim whatever it wants, even that the Miranda warnings should never be required and that Miranda v Arizona was wrongly decided.

The public safety exception that they're talking about has existed for many years, but the issue is whether this given situation falls within that exception. That will be up to the court, if the government offers answers to custodial interrogation questions at trial.

THEY DON'T HAVE TO READ HIM HIS RIGHTS. They don't have to read ANYONE their rights.

I.e -- cops can pick him up, arrest him, book him, and wait to read the rights. The reading of the rights is if the cops want to use the answers to convict him. That's where the exceptions come in. Sometimes, not reading rights won't prevent a confession under custodial interrogation from being admitted -- like - if a victim is thought to be in danger and you have to ask the guy where she is in order to save her and the clock is ticking. Then that will likely not bar admission of the cop's testimony about the conviction.

Remember - what we're talking about is a cop taking the stand to testify what the guy said - an admission.

Close, but not quite correct. No, a police officer is NOT required to give the Miranda warning...ever. Yes, if the cop questions the suspect without first giving the warning and receiving a knowing voluntary waiver of that right, the evidence thereby produced becomes the "fruit of the poisonous tree" and MAY be excluded at trial. The key to Miranda is that the person must be "in custody," which has a very specific meaning that goes beyond not just being unfree to leave. Temporary detentions (Stone/Terry stops) for investigative purposes are not generally "arrests" even though the person may be handcuffed, patted down and asked questions. The pat-down and the handcuffing may be legitimately used by police for their protection, and they may detain someone for a "reasonable" period of time (two hours is about the limit) while they are "actively pursuing" evidence in a criminal case and have a "reasonable suspicion" that the person detained is involved. Yes, they can ask questions during that detention and no, they will generally not be thrown out by the court unless the "totality of the circumstances" would lead a reasonable person to believe that they were under arrest and not free to leave. Moving the suspect about is one of the primary indicators of arrest, which is why in a situation where they need a victim to identify the suspect in the field, the bring the VICTIM to the SUSPECT rather than placing the suspect in a police car and moving him to the victim. Likewise, something as simple as leaving the door open on the patrol car when you ask the person to sit in it has been found to frustrate a claim of an arrest. It's all quite complex and nuanced, and cops make mistakes that get evidence thrown out all the time.

But the key to Miranda is "interrogation" or questioning. If a police officer does not wish to ask any incriminating questions (identity questions are always legal) of the suspect, he need not give the Miranda warning and anything the suspect says on his own, including utterances against interest (confessions) are admissible.

I once got a solid conviction on a grandpa who was molesting his young granddaughters, who were old enough to give me enough evidence to arrest but not really old enough to testify in court, without asking him a single question. I called him in to the PD saying I needed to talk to him, and when he arrived I told him he was under arrest for sexual assault on a child. I asked him nothing, but I did put my microcassette tape recorder on the seat back by the barrier and recorded everything he said on the way to jail, which was more than an hour's drive. During the drive he asked me, "Well, what would you do with them pretty young girls tormenting you?" I replied "I don't know," and he proceeded to admit to the sexual abuse and told the whole story on tape by the time we got to the jail. He went to prison for 10 years (should have been 30) on a plea-bargain.

So, the two determining factors that make Miranda a good idea are a) Custody; and b) Questioning. If you don't want to use his admissions against him however, like in this case where their actions are fully recorded on videotape and photographs so there's nothing needed from them, you can ask them all the questions you like about confederates or co-conspirators without Miranda, because Miranda only applies to THAT PERSON, not to someone he may implicate. You can't use his telling about confederates against HIM of course, but it's valid evidence towards probable cause to arrest the confederates.

This is why many police investigations involve the cops making declarative statements like "you really need to be honest with us" and "if you lie to me I can't help you" rather than asking "did you kill your girlfriend?" Declarative statements by the police that persuade the suspect to incriminate himself voluntarily (ie: without being asked a question) are valid and admissible.

[Tero]

Onion spin
http://www.theonion.com/articles/islami ... itt,32189/

[Warren Dew]

Boston bomber Tamerlan sat home collecting WELFARE benefits while plotting to bomb America (and his wife worked 80 hours a week)

Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, received welfare up until 2012
His wife Katherine worked up to 80 hours a week as a home healthcare worker while Tamerlan stayed at home
The Tsarnaev brothers received state aid as children, when their parents relied on welfare benefits after immigrating to the U.S.
Dzhokhar, 19, sold pot to make spending money at college, friends say

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z2RRxxKqWg

Now we know why all of Dzhokhar's friends thought he was such a great guy.

[pErvinalia]

Dole bludgers. Gateway to blowing stuff up.

[JimC]

Dole bludgers. Gateway to blowing stuff up.

I know you're taking the piss, and being rightly sarcastic about a causal link...

But...

If the guy had been fully involved in something, a challenging career or course of studies, then maybe the festering resentment and ultimate capture by jihadist ideas wouldn't have happened...

The devil finds work for idle hands...

[Hermit]

If the guy had been fully involved in something, a challenging career or course of studies, then maybe the festering resentment and ultimate capture by jihadist ideas wouldn't have happened...

The devil finds work for idle hands...

While we're at it, let's ban breastfeeding. The vast majority of heroin addicts started on their mother's milk.

[JimC]

If the guy had been fully involved in something, a challenging career or course of studies, then maybe the festering resentment and ultimate capture by jihadist ideas wouldn't have happened...

The devil finds work for idle hands...

While we're at it, let's ban breastfeeding. The vast majority of heroin addicts started on their mother's milk.

Remember, I'm not implying causation in the slightest...

Simply speculating about paths through life that may be more or less likely to lead to the bitter anger that must be at the core of terrorist actions like this...

[Hermit]

I'm not implying causation in the slightest...

paths through life that may be more or less likely to lead to...

You really don't see a bit of a contradiction there?

[JimC]

I'm not implying causation in the slightest...

paths through life that may be more or less likely to lead to...

You really don't see a bit of a contradiction there?

I suppose I'm using the term "causation" to cover the simplistic idea that "the reason he did the bombing was that he was a bored loser living on social security", which would clearly be nonsense.

However, is there anything too terrible in exploring the idea that people who are absorbed in a fulfilling job or set of studies are perhaps less likely to let hatreds fester and lead to violent actions?

[Hermit]

I suppose I'm using the term "causation" to cover the simplistic idea that "the reason he did the bombing was that he was a bored loser living on social security", which would clearly be nonsense.

Ayup.

However, is there anything too terrible in exploring the idea that people who are absorbed in a fulfilling job or set of studies are perhaps less likely to let hatreds fester and lead to violent actions?

No, nothing.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Boston bomber Tamerlan sat home collecting WELFARE benefits while plotting to bomb America (and his wife worked 80 hours a week)

Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, received welfare up until 2012
His wife Katherine worked up to 80 hours a week as a home healthcare worker while Tamerlan stayed at home
The Tsarnaev brothers received state aid as children, when their parents relied on welfare benefits after immigrating to the U.S.
Dzhokhar, 19, sold pot to make spending money at college, friends say

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z2RRxxKqWg

Now we know why all of Dzhokhar's friends thought he was such a great guy.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/dzhoka ... ail,32184/

[pErvinalia]

Dole bludgers. Gateway to blowing stuff up.

I know you're taking the piss, and being rightly sarcastic about a causal link...

But...

If the guy had been fully involved in something, a challenging career or course of studies, then maybe the festering resentment and ultimate capture by jihadist ideas wouldn't have happened...

The devil finds work for idle hands...

Quite possibly true. It's just that it is the daily fail, and they capitalised WELFARE just to make sure we all got the message.

[pErvinalia]

I'm not implying causation in the slightest...

paths through life that may be more or less likely to lead to...

You really don't see a bit of a contradiction there?

Why are you asking yourself questions? Are you MPD?

[Coito ergo sum]

Boston bomber Tamerlan sat home collecting WELFARE benefits while plotting to bomb America (and his wife worked 80 hours a week)

Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, received welfare up until 2012
His wife Katherine worked up to 80 hours a week as a home healthcare worker while Tamerlan stayed at home
The Tsarnaev brothers received state aid as children, when their parents relied on welfare benefits after immigrating to the U.S.
Dzhokhar, 19, sold pot to make spending money at college, friends say

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z2RRxxKqWg

Now we know why all of Dzhokhar's friends thought he was such a great guy.

They must have committed welfare fraud, because the wife working 80 hours a week as a home healthcare provider would put them over the threshold for collecting welfare. Either that, or the system in Massachusetts is woefully underpoliced.

That's typical, though. There are a lot of scammers -- they lie to get the benefits. They work under the table and say they make nothing. You get able bodied folks like these deadbeats getting welfare, food stamps, free food and clothing, etc. It's a crying shame. Disgusting people.