No right to lawyer during questioning, says top court

[msdogfood]

See this!

comments concerns???

What do you think???.

[bush_cheney2004]

...What do you think???.

I think Canadians have been watching American television so long that some actually think they have "Miranda rights".

[msdogfood]

I think Canadians have been watching American television so long that some actually think they have "Miranda rights".

Yes i know Canada never had "Miranda rights".

So what do you think of Fridays supreme court decision's??

[bush_cheney2004]

Yes i know Canada never had "Miranda rights".

So what do you think of Fridays supreme court decision's??

I think the court has just stated the status quo....Canadians don't have the "right" to counsel being present before interrogation and police can still attempt interrogation even if a perp chooses to remain silent.

I just find it comical that the expectation of anything different has largely been set by years of watching American cop shows.

[eyeball]

No right to lawyer during questioning?

You still have the right to keep quiet. What are they going to do, torture you?

[punked]

I think it is crazy. Point being some civil Liberaites lobby group needs to go around the nation telling everyone to keep their mouth closed no matter what. It just adds to the culture of never talking to the police and if that is what they want well they got it.

[jbg]

Yes i know Canada never had "Miranda rights".

So what do you think of Fridays supreme court decision's??

To the extent that the decision holds that Canadians don't have a right to a lawyer during interrogation, or to interrupt an interogation, I disagree with it. The "right to lawyer" decision was not the Miranda decision but Gideon v. Wainwright. Miranda held that a suspect must be advised of his right to a lawyer before interrogation starts. To the extent that Miranda can be easily complied with it's useful but I agree that it's not constitutionally required. It was to remedy racially abusive practices that were prevalent at the time.

[msdogfood]

To the extent that the decision holds that Canadians don't have a right to a lawyer during interrogation, or to interrupt an interogation, I disagree with it. The "right to lawyer" decision was not the Miranda decision but Gideon v. Wainwright. Miranda held that a suspect must be advised of his right to a lawyer before interrogation starts. To the extent that Miranda can be easily complied with it's useful but I agree that it's not constitutionally required. It was to remedy racially abusive practices that were prevalent at the time.

Thank-you for pointing that out!!

[Mr.Canada]

I've been arrested many times in the past and I have never been interrogated. When arrested you don't need to agree to talk. I was always polite and always told them I have nothing to say. You'll then be led to the bullpen, they don't care whether they talk or not they're just doing their jobs.

They aren't going to torture you or anything. Just tell them you have nothing to say. It's really not that hard.

Never cooperate with the police under any circumstances. Unless you want to be labeled a rat and spend your time in PC(protective custody) with the other rats, rapists and child molesters. If they have enough to charge you let them prove your guilt why should you help them to do their job?

Edited October 10, 2010 by Mr.Canada

[ToadBrother]

I think Canadians have been watching American television so long that some actually think they have "Miranda rights".

There are a few Americans who wished that Miranda didn't exist either.

[ToadBrother]

I've been arrested many times in the past and I have never been interrogated. When arrested you don't need to agree to talk. I was always polite and always told them I have nothing to say. You'll then be led to the bullpen, they don't care whether they talk or not they're just doing their jobs.

They aren't going to torture you or anything. Just tell them you have nothing to say. It's really not that hard.

Never cooperate with the police under any circumstances. Unless you want to be labeled a rat and spend your time in PC(protective custody) with the other rats, rapists and child molesters. If they have enough to charge you let them prove your guilt why should you help them to do their job?

I was told a long time ago say nothing to the cops before you've talked to counsel. If your innocent, there's still a substantial risk that you can harm yourself if the cops are convinced of your guilt. If your guilty, well, there's no reason at all to talk to the police.

[bush_cheney2004]

There are a few Americans who wished that Miranda didn't exist either.

I'm sure there are, but they don't need the US Supreme Court to remind them that the Miranda warning has existed since the 1960's, as it is part of American television culture. A new verb was born....to "Mirandize".

BTW, Mr. Ernesto Miranda was retried and convicted in Arizona without admitting the problematic confession evidence.

[jbg]

Thank-you for pointing that out!!

For pointing which of many facts out?

[msdogfood]

For pointing which of many facts out?

Gideon v. Wainwright.

[msdogfood]

I've been arrested many times in the past and I have never been interrogated. When arrested you don't need to agree to talk. I was always polite and always told them I have nothing to say. You'll then be led to the bullpen, they don't care whether they talk or not they're just doing their jobs.

They aren't going to torture you or anything. Just tell them you have nothing to say. It's really not that hard.

Never cooperate with the police under any circumstances. Unless you want to be labeled a rat and spend your time in PC(protective custody) with the other rats, rapists and child molesters. If they have enough to charge you let them prove your guilt why should you help them to do their job?

They ask you to agree to talk

Don't they just ask away anyway???.

[jbg]

Gideon v. Wainwright.

Oh OK. In fact Anthony Lewis, a well-known New York Times columnist wrote a highly regarded book called Gideon's Trumpet about the decision. I have little doubt that Gideon should be the law; I go back and forth on Miranda. Gideon seems to be firmly based on the Constitution's text, i.e. the right to be represented by counsel. On the other hand Miranda involves notification of rights and I believe that perhaps people should familiarize themselves with their rights and responsibilities before committing crimes.

[DrGreenthumb]

I've been arrested many times in the past and I have never been interrogated. When arrested you don't need to agree to talk. I was always polite and always told them I have nothing to say. You'll then be led to the bullpen, they don't care whether they talk or not they're just doing their jobs.

They aren't going to torture you or anything. Just tell them you have nothing to say. It's really not that hard.

Never cooperate with the police under any circumstances. Unless you want to be labeled a rat and spend your time in PC(protective custody) with the other rats, rapists and child molesters. If they have enough to charge you let them prove your guilt why should you help them to do their job?

LOL this is the first time I've read good advice from you MR.C. Any good lawyer will advise you to only say 2 words to every question the cops ask you. I'll give everyone those two words free of charge. They are "NO COMMENT".