Boston Marathon Explosion

jephdood

No way, man. Most of us don't read.

tonyb

Evidence ? For which crime ? The bombings themselves, the killing of the security guard, the robbing of the convenience store, the car jacking, throwing bombs at the police and shooting at them ? Truth is, we don't know what evidence has been gathered so far but miranda rights should be given regardless. I know there is some legal leway for not doing it, but it still may not hold muster in a court of law. In other words, why risk it ? Why risk any or all charges being dropped because of a miranda rights issue ? Just because we have a law on the books doesn't mean it will hold up constitutionaly once challenged.

I know each and every one of us would like to see justice done, but we have to wait for this to play out before making assumptions. I'm sure they will leave lots of room to be critical of the process.

mhardy6647

The kid is a US citizen.

There are matters of national security at stake.

i.e., it's a tricky situation but I reckon that Justice will likely be meted out as intended by "the framers of the Constitution"; assuming that the suspect survives.

cfrizz

Viper I don't know where you are getting your info, but he JUST got captured by LEO's. Now that he has been he WILL be tried in some USA Federal court for his crimes. It was said last night that now that they have him, the legal side now gets to go to work to put his butt away for the rest of his life or if we are really lucky given the death penalty.

So long as he never gets to kill anyone else, I don't care how it happens.

ViperZ

cfrizz wrote: »

So long as he never gets to kill anyone else, I don't care how it happens.

See how quickly you jump to conclusions? IF he has actually committed the crime, then I agree with you. But first they have to prove it. Have a fair trial, prove that he is guilty, punish him accordingly. Simple. That's my whole point.

The justice system actually works both ways too. Like tonyb mentioned, for those of you who are trigger happy lynchers, if his constitutional rights were not respected when he was arrested, it may play a horrible joke if he is actually guilty.

rpf65

Why is everybody so up in arms about the suspect not being read his Miranda rights immediatly upon arrest. I'm not a lawyer, but there is 2 parts to being read your rights. The first being that they are explained to you, and if possible video taped. I'm sure there will be a video of some law enforcement type reading them off a card in front of at least one other law enforcement type at some point.

The second part of being read your rights is that you understand them. In other words are you mentally capable as well as physically capable of understanding them. The first thing that law enforcement should have done, after arresting him and securing him, is get a medical person to check him out.

This is very high profile, and the last thing any prosecuter would want to hear is the accused was so weak from whatever trauma he sustained that he couldn't have possibly understood his rights. So, in my opinion, if they left him guarded, in some medical treatment room, even makeshift, and read him his rights the next day there is no violation of any law. There is no technical violation nor is the spirit of the law violated.

SHould he mutter a name or 2 before he is Mirandized, and that information is noted by somebody, it can be used for inteligence gathering purposes, but not prosecutorial evidence. The point being is he was just arrested after running for quite a while, and more than likely injured. He may not have understood those rights, or at least could claime he didn't.

SDA1C

cnh wrote: »

I'm "pretty" sure I know what this means and "where" it is coming from but "I" am not going there because it would be as inappropriate? Transparency is not just a term used for reproducing music here! lol

Just good that this is all in hand. And, of course, THEY'RE not going to tell US everything--how DUMB would that be? Think about it!

cnh

Thank you. It's nice to know there are some left that are not mindless sheep. And yes lack of elaboration most likely keeps me from joining Noosh and BRG. Hopefully we have a bit of a discovery come Monday, eh?

F1nut

ViperZ wrote: »

Wow. Seriously. You're "pretty sure" that "government feels". And he is already denied his Miranda rights. How do you know that he is guilty? Because police said that he is guilty? So you'll be happy that he is declared guilty, you have no idea what happened, closed deal? What if YOUR constitution rights were violated, you were taken off the street, thrown into jail with no rights, declared terrorist and never fairly tried?
Somehow when your constitutional rights are violated when your government wants to perform background checks before people buy guns, you all go crazy, but when a person gets arrested, gets denied his Miranda rights with no clear evidence, that's ok. Why not just publicly lynch him? F*k his rights, screw the constitution, which you all are so eager to defend when it affects only YOU personally, right?

Wow! Seriously indeed! Is there some reason that you think this dirt bag, POS isn't gulity?

IMO, they should have shot him dead on sight and saved the US taxpayers a ton of money.

cfrizz

He and his brother ADMITTED to being the the bombers to the man who they carjacked, then let him GO, he WILL be called to testify. they fired & tossed explosives at the LEOs who gave chase to that CARJACKED car. His brother was left at the scene of where that car came to a stop in Watertown where another gun battle ensued and he ran OVER his brother to get away.

There was yet ANOTHER gun battle at the boat where he was taken prisoner. They will have confiscated everthing he left in the carjacked car as well as the carjacked car and whatever was with/on him when they captured him. They will also have done the same at the apt where he and his brother lived.

I have no doubt that they have more than enough evidence to convict him and so does everyone who watched this unfold across the WORLD all DAY yesterday!

This is one of the benefits of having a free press. Even when the reporters had to go further back from the scene for their safety, they were able to lock down a camera to continue recording whatever was going on.

And let me also say that for once ALL branches of law enforcement worked as they should have and cooperated together to bring this to a fairly quick conclusion. For that the occupants of MA are truly grateful. THANK YOU to all of you from all over the East Coast who came to help us out!

cfrizz

F1nut wrote: »

Wow! Seriously indeed! Is there some reason that you think this dirt bag, POS isn't gulity?

IMO, they should have shot him dead on sight and saved the US taxpayers a ton of money.

It is not often that I agree with Jesse, but in this I am in COMPLETE agreement. Just from the evidence that was on tv yesterday is a slam dunk conviction and the miserable coward needs to join his rabid dog of a brother in HELL!

You just might feel differently if it had happened in your state.

jephdood

I'm glad they got him alive. There may be more dirtbags we can find because of it. Which, IMO, is more important than taxpayer dollars.

BlueFox

I'm also glad he is alive since I want to find out how much religion played in this case. So far, the media is tip toeing around the subject. It doesn't make much sense for Chechen political issues to be active in this country.

mrbigbluelight

jephdood wrote: »

I'm glad they got him alive. There may be more dirtbags we can find because of it. Which, IMO, is more important than taxpayer dollars.

I agree. That does not mean, of course, that either one of us is suggesting that the brother should be nominated for sainthood.
By all appearances, this guy (and his brother) are guilty as sin, IMO. They probably couldn't be more guilty if they had tried.

Regarding Miranda rights, the correctly noted "safety" exception and "self utterance" exceptions have been posted.
But I would again suggest that the Miranda issue is not applicable. The POTUS (or an appropriate agency administrator) has declared the brother was either a terrorist or was engaged in acts that were in support of terrorism. NDAA.
Therefore, this person has no rights. Period. NDAA.
This person is an American citizen. Doesn't matter. NDAA.

Not being political. This is what is.

I'm curious as to why the government hasn't applied the provisions of the NDAA in this case when they can (should ?).

nooshinjohn

The suspect must also be CONCIOUS and able to respond to the reading of those rights... This guy is in a coma for all we know, so reading or not reading those rights is mute at this point...


If he is to be tried in a civilian court, he will get his rights read to him as soon as he invokes is right to counsel. If he is declared an enemy combatant, then a different set of rights will be applied. If I were Immigration, he would be stripped of his citizenship before he opens his eyes.

My deepest condolences and sympathy for the people who lost their lives, the injured and the people of Boston for the suffering they have endured this week.

obieone

This guy WILL be read his Miranda rights, WHEN he is coherent. If they read him his rights under the influence of morphine, then guess what? His attorney will win on appeal, because it's a little hard to understand your rights, when your TRIPPING your balls off.

obieone

I don't know if it's true or not, but I heard they had this guy at Beth Israel hospital.......Is that Kosher?

dkg999

I heard they ordered the pressure cookers from Canada.

nooshinjohn

dkg999 wrote: »

I heard they ordered the pressure cookers from Canada.

And soon you will need a permit and a backround check to buy one...

tonyb

Hold on a second Mike, before we go down that road lets recap. We don't know about any warrantless searches. Suspected bombers thought to be ARMED and dangerous are on the loose in your town. Police go door to door searching/asking possibly to have permission to search properties. Who was going to say "no" ? Especially if your houshold is unarmed. I highly doubt they just broke down doors in search of these 2. That would be another story altogether.

Fear is a very powerfull motivator. It motivates people to protect themselves by any means possible....or not too. Fear drives policy, legislation, or lack there of. All I know is, living in fear is not living so in order to not live in fear one must do what they can to ensure the safety of their own family from whatever makes you afraid. That means different things to different people as many hold a variety of fears. Could be you want a security camera around your house, get a big dog, maybe arm yourself, bodyguards, even the way we vote is fear related. Fear is also manipulated to advance agendas, has been for centuries.

Thing is, when masses of people are in fear, who ya gonna call ? Ghost Busters ? You call the people with the guns to protect you, federal agencies, local police. I doubt any nutjob jihadist is going to go into a NRA convention to kill people for obvious reasons. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the answer is to arm everyone, but limiting that small aspect sure isn't the answer either.

I guess what I'm trying to say is lets not jump to the extreme positions on either side, especially since there is soo much we don't know yet....and thats the missing key ingredient, information.

bikezappa

A few questions:

Has anyone talked to the owner of the highjacked SUV?

Where did this SUV go after blasting through the police blockade? Location?

How could a wounded man evade all those police after stopping the SUV?

cfrizz

Oh for the love of God, get a grip Mike, this chase and gun battle were going on from 10:00 on Thursday night. Last time I checked gun shots were loud when you hear a lot of them in your neighborhood and turn on the tv to see what is going on, you are going to lock everything up and pray he doesn't end up in your backyard. If uniformed cops come and knocks on your door asking for permission are you going to be macho man and say no because you have a gun to supposedly protect yourself.

Are you going to put a gun in Janey's hands so she can search your house with you? This was an extreme situation with someone who had no hesitation to kill a cop in his car and he had a gun to protect himself!

At some point you have to put aside your massive paranoia about the evil government trodding on your rights and use your common sense.

NJPOLKER

F1nut wrote: »

Wow! Seriously indeed! Is there some reason that you think this dirt bag, POS isn't gulity?

IMO, they should have shot him dead on sight and saved the US taxpayers a ton of money.

I disagree to a point. It's great they have one of them alive so they can interrogate him. Now after you extract as much info as possible make him a few promises, like you will be forgiven and receive a light sentence. Then wait a day or two so he starts to feel a little better and then tell him we lied you heap of sh.. and pour a small amount of gas on him and light up.

I know I am no better than a terrorist if I did and don't really think we should do it but feels good to vent.

Can you imagine his life in a jail cell? That has to be torture in itself. And how will his fellow inmates treat him if they can get close?

Hopefully he won't be anal retentive very long.

When I have heard some people who knew these two things say they were cool and nice it does not surprise me. They tried to fit in and all so that's what they had to do. I just wish the media let it out they they both had bad breath, syphilis, clap, ED problems and so on..... F'em they have/had zero redeeming qualities.

I didn't go to church this morning because my allergies are bothering me so here was my own sermon.

bmbguy

On the Miranda rights:

http://www.volokh.com/2013/04/20/tsarnaev-and-miranda-rights/

A lot of people assume that the police are required to read a suspect his Miranda rights upon arrest. That is, they assume that one of a person’s rights is the right to be read their rights. It often happens that way on Law & Order, but that’s not what the law actually requires. The police aren’t required to follow Miranda. Miranda is a set of rules the government can chose to follow if they want to admit a person’s statements in a criminal case in court, not a set of rules they have to follow in every case.

---

...contrary to what a lot of people think, it is legal for the government to even intentionally violate Miranda so long as they don’t try to seek admission of the suspect’s statements in court.

More stuff at the link.

tonyb

Well now, thats the key. "...as long as they don't try to seek admission of the suspects statements in court." What good does it do if the suspect admits to everything and you can't use that when the trial happens ? Mind you, all of that is irrelevant since he was branded a terrorist hence a different set of rules apply.....like none.

The fear alot have is the expanding definition of what exactly constitutes a "terrorist".

bmbguy

I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV...and I didn't even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

But I think the idea is that if they read him his rights, they then have to wait for him to decide to waive his rights if they were to try to extract further information out of him. My very crude understanding is that, in a case like this, they may believe they already have enough evidence against him to get a conviction in court that they don't need further statements. And now, it's all about interrogation and attempting to get more information/intelligence out of him. So, they'll read him his Miranda rights when they're good and ready. Or maybe not at all.

goofyGAguy

Keiko wrote: »

in my opinion, I see this country morally decaying.

Only the willfully blind could not see this.

Drenis

Keiko wrote: »

Tony and Cathy, for obvious reasons, I'm not going to comment further since it's gets too close to a taboo topic. I'll just reiterate, there's a high probability America is going to see more and more of this kind of stuff. Paranoia? I don't think so. Just a logical assumption based on how I see it. I hope I'm wrong, I really do and you may disagree, but in my opinion, I see this country morally decaying. And that's as far as I'm going with it. Just glad you're OK, Cathy and glad more people didn't get hurt. This could have ended up a lot worse.... Peace.

I agree with you. People need to get educated on many things that are of concern to which, most don't even know these types of issues exist.

Face

I saw an interview where a woman stated she would not let officers into her home, and they left without incident, so get over yourself.

mrbigbluelight

Face wrote: »

I saw an interview where a woman stated she would not let officers into her home, and they left without incident, so get over yourself.

Face wrote: »

I saw an interview where a woman stated she would not let officers into her home, and they left without incident, so get over yourself.

"They left without incident" ?

It would seem to me that there is a problem with that scenario.
The city of Boston is locked down. Police/military are going block-by-by, conducting door-to-door searches for a person involved in a domestic terrorism incident that caused death and numerous severe injuries.

"KNOCK-KNOCK-KNOCK. POLICE. OPEN UP. WE NEED TO CONDUCT A SEARCH OF THE PREMISES FOR AN ARMED AND DANGEROUS TERRORIST"

""Go away. He's not here. Don't bother me again."

" UHM ...... WELL ............... OKAY. WE'RE LEAVING NOW. SORRY."

If that scenario did play out as described, would one describe that as "good police procedure" ?
Would that scenario have enabled an armed and deadly terrorist to possibly escape capture ?
If the woman answering the door had spoken Chechen, Arabic, or Farsi: would a translator have been brought to the scene or would her door have come down immediately ?

My respectful suggestion is to question everything.
The people who were killed or injured in Boston deserve that, IMO.

SDA1C

tonyb wrote: »

Hold on a second Mike, before we go down that road lets recap. We don't know about any warrantless searches. Suspected bombers thought to be ARMED and dangerous are on the loose in your town. Police go door to door searching/asking possibly to have permission to search properties. Who was going to say "no" ? Especially if your houshold is unarmed. I highly doubt they just broke down doors in search of these 2. That would be another story altogether.

Fear is a very powerfull motivator. It motivates people to protect themselves by any means possible....or not too. Fear drives policy, legislation, or lack there of. All I know is, living in fear is not living so in order to not live in fear one must do what they can to ensure the safety of their own family from whatever makes you afraid. That means different things to different people as many hold a variety of fears. Could be you want a security camera around your house, get a big dog, maybe arm yourself, bodyguards, even the way we vote is fear related. Fear is also manipulated to advance agendas, has been for centuries.

Thing is, when masses of people are in fear, who ya gonna call ? Ghost Busters ? You call the people with the guns to protect you, federal agencies, local police. I doubt any nutjob jihadist is going to go into a NRA convention to kill people for obvious reasons. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the answer is to arm everyone, but limiting that small aspect sure isn't the answer either.

I guess what I'm trying to say is lets not jump to the extreme positions on either side, especially since there is soo much we don't know yet....and thats the missing key ingredient, information.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nrkcUV_7Qk
I may not have 20/20 but I am sure I missed the, "We have a warrant", part.