Center for Constitutional Rights Condemns Miranda Exception in Boston Marathon Suspect Case

[limpyhobbler]

April 20, 2013, New York – Today, Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) Executive Director Vincent Warren released the following statement in response to the news that the government had decided not to read the suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings his Miranda rights before interrogating him for what is now the longest exception to date

Our thoughts go out to the friends and families of victims of these horrific bombings. While it is difficult to turn to points of law in times of tragedy, those are, in fact, the times we most need to cling to the values, laws and rights that make us who we are as a nation.

The Miranda warnings were put in place because police officers were beating and torturing "confessions" out of people who hadn't even been formally accused of a crime. We cannot afford to repeat our mistakes. If officials require suspects to incriminate themselves, they are making fair trials and due process merely option and not a requirement. To venture down that road again will make law enforcement accountable to no one.

Like Obama's expanded killing program and his perpetuation of indefinite detention without trial at Guantanamo, this is yet another erosion of the Constitution to lay directly at the President's feet. Obama's Justice Department unilaterally expanded the "public safety exception" to Miranda in 2010 beyond anything the Supreme Court ever authorized. Each time the administration use this exception, it stretches wider and longer. However horrific the crime, continuing to erode constitutional rights invites continued abuse by law enforcement, and walks us down a dangerous path that becomes nearly impossible to reverse.

http://ggsidedocs.blogspot.com/2013/04/ccr-condemns-miranda-exception-in.html


Posted 2 hours ago by Glenn Greenwald

[Cleita]

1. I was wondering why organizations that are supposed to be there to make sure

our civil liberties are protected haven't spoken up until now. Kudos to them for doing so. Now how about the rest?

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. The ACLU has as well

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/20/boston-suspect-miranda-rights-activists

[Cleita]

3. Good. I hope more of them come forward to the point where the authorities

can't ignore them.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. They will be ignored

This did not start with Obama, or bush or the GWOT it started in the 1980s.

If the questions are limited to what originated this doctrine, I think none of the civil defense groups will have too many issues in the end.

These are things like...

1.- are there any active bombs

2- Where are they?

3.- Are there any more explosives?

4.- Where are they?

The case originated with a missing gun in possible reach of children. That was in the 1980s. The defense argued that it was admitting position of the gun, and wanted that thrown out.

If those questions (unlikely) are limited to that, not even hard core civil libertarians will have an issue. Problem is I doubt they will limit themselves to that. In this case asking about explosives...is truly not a violation. These two admitted responsibility to their hostage.

Kid has an injured mouth, they got 48 hours

[limpyhobbler]

5. I'm glad they are there too.

Honestly I'm not sure what is the right thing in this particular case. But I'm glad people like Greenwald and Center for Constitutional Rights are out there. So we have an opportunity to hear from that viewpoint and make up our own minds what is the right thing to do.
Without folks like those there would be nobody pushing back against the gradual erosion of liberties.