Innocent people are arrested all the time, the stupid ones incriminate themselves. See the one thing the innocent (if in fact they are) have on their side is the truth. There is for sure something fishy with what is going on here and I have not quite figured it out either. As for understanding your rights, I can neither confirm nor deny that I have ever had my rights read to me but I'm pretty sure the officer asks you after he/she has read them if you understand. On a side note, if the arresting officer happens to be a really hot female, hitting on them while in cuffs is apparently not the best way to get a date with her. I guess it isn't that appealing but again I can neither confirm nor deny how I know this.
Not in Arizona, no habla de englis? Book em Dan-O well at least after the 9th circus upholds the stupid decision of last week and it goes to the SCOTUS and my boy Antonin shows em how it is done.:grin:
But being stupid is not a crime. Than God. I'd be on death row. I once read about how some cops tricked a retarded guy into confessing to a murder he didn't commit by phrasing the question like this "Did you not kill that boy." The guy answered no, and they called that a confession. A grand jury agreed and indicted him. He was convicted and locked up for a while before he was cleared by DNA. That is obviously what I meant. No. It is the opposite of that. The accused is now responsible to say "I am going to remain silent... starting now." Before the accused expressly invokes this right it is presumed to be waived and questioning can go on.
We make em sign sheets of paper that have it written on there and that they read and then we read it to them- and then that they understand. Then they sign it again if they want to waive or not.
I think it is possible to gain an indictment on a ham sandwhich if you present it right. That is mainly because of the jury pool though but I see your point. There is or at least there should be a wide margin between a dumbass that talks his way into getting arrested even though he did nothing wrong and someone with a handicap. I think what you described sounds more like dirty lazy cops than the system going wrong. I remember that case as well. Oh and you are right, boy if stupid were a crime I'd be in T-R-O-U-B-L-E Thats right you do have to sign a ..... wait a minute, I have no idea what you are talking about. It sounds like a good idea though.
Easy fix. Require the police to video all interrogations from arrest to conviction. Then a jury can see any dubious confession in context. And they can see if a suspect seems to be sick, drunk, looney, drugged, confused or just a dummy.
yep thats why its kinda sad when you scummy cops turn off that recorder in front of the suspect--- like the main video/audio isnt still on-- and then they spill their guts thinking this is just b/t you and me. poor chaps. thats not really nice. Only the japanese. This is exactly what ozzie was talking about.
They are usually guilty of something. I have never been arrested, mirandized or spent a minute in jail. Funny how that works if you don't break any laws.
You may be on to something since cops and DAs and judges never make mistakes we should just do away with this whole due process thing. :rolleye33: In the real world perfectly innocent people who never even sped get arrested and convicted of crimes for looking too much like a suspect. Google Clyde Charles for an example.
