Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 07:52 PM Apr 2013

Public defenders will represent Boston bomb suspect

Source: CBS/AP

BOSTON Federal public defenders have agreed to represent the suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings.

Miriam Conrad, the federal defender for Massachusetts, says her office expects to represent Dzhokhar Tsarnaev after he is charged. Tsarnaev remained hospitalized Saturday after being wounded in a firefight with police Friday. His brother was killed.

Conrad says she believes Dzhokhar should have a lawyer appointed as soon as possible because there are "serious issues regarding possible interrogation."

U.S. officials said a special interrogation team for high-value suspects would question him without reading him his Miranda rights, under a public safety exception that exists to protect police and the public from immediate danger. Miranda rights include the right to remain silent and the right to have a lawyer.

###

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57580591/public-defenders-will-represent-boston-bomb-suspect/

33 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Public defenders will represent Boston bomb suspect (Original Post) DonViejo Apr 2013 OP
I certainly hope so. Someone has to, otherwise the system is a fraud. enough Apr 2013 #1
+1. nt awoke_in_2003 Apr 2013 #33
Is this not very disturbing...... MAD Dave Apr 2013 #2
There's been a lot of discussion about it on DU -- gateley Apr 2013 #4
Does the window (IIRC, 48 hours) start when he was taken into custody, City Lights Apr 2013 #8
I don't know, but I also heard it can be flexible. Not to the extreme -- gateley Apr 2013 #9
Yeah, it wouldn't make sense to start the clock if he was unable to talk. nt City Lights Apr 2013 #13
for 50 mins only its an American national security thing- after 9/11 many new laws in 10 days . Sunlei Apr 2013 #5
HIPAA rules prevent disclosure of his medical info Yo_Mama Apr 2013 #30
thank you for the link to the law.. Sunlei Apr 2013 #31
If he knows of other bombs Control-Z Apr 2013 #6
He's still entitled to remain silent eggplant Apr 2013 #12
In Canada you don't have a right to legal counsel while being interrogated. Leslie Valley Apr 2013 #11
Canada practices rather open entrapment, and it's completely legal alcibiades_mystery Apr 2013 #17
I knew this.... MAD Dave Apr 2013 #26
I recall being assigned to the UK in the early 1980s. During our in-processing, base legal told 24601 Apr 2013 #32
ACLU reminds us that even in difficult times we must not waiver from a tried and true justice midnight Apr 2013 #28
John Adams lobodons Apr 2013 #3
Adams gets more credit than your post might imply. Jim Lane Apr 2013 #23
I think that some publicity hound type defense attorney will end up taking the case. olddad56 Apr 2013 #7
Thankfully it probably won't be Gloria Allred. :-) gateley Apr 2013 #10
He can remain silent.... LovingA2andMI Apr 2013 #14
Really? Why isn't JimDandy Apr 2013 #15
There are no better attorneys than Federal Public Defenders for a case like this. rug Apr 2013 #16
True dat . . . fleur-de-lisa Apr 2013 #18
there might also be a vehicular manslaughter charge against him..... lastlib Apr 2013 #22
Good point . . . I hope so. fleur-de-lisa Apr 2013 #24
Attornies do things John2 Apr 2013 #29
What? No high profile attention seeker wants the case?? Go figure. kestrel91316 Apr 2013 #19
Some high-profile attorney will pop up JustABozoOnThisBus Apr 2013 #20
Paging Bobby Donnell . . . Nt geek tragedy Apr 2013 #21
K&R Solly Mack Apr 2013 #25
Good. If we are to treat him equally... MOTRDemocrat Apr 2013 #27

enough

(13,235 posts)
1. I certainly hope so. Someone has to, otherwise the system is a fraud.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 07:58 PM
Apr 2013

And thanks to the public defenders for their service.

MAD Dave

(204 posts)
2. Is this not very disturbing......
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 07:59 PM
Apr 2013

....."U.S. officials said a special interrogation team for high-value suspects would question him without reading him his Miranda rights, under a public safety exception that exists to protect police and the public from immediate danger. Miranda rights include the right to remain silent and the right to have a lawyer. ".

It would seem to me that once in custody that he would no longer be a threat to law enforcement or the public and that his Miranda rights would need to remain intact.........Maybe being Canadian makes me naive but seems pretty fundamental to me?

gateley

(62,683 posts)
4. There's been a lot of discussion about it on DU --
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:08 PM
Apr 2013

They have a window where they can question him before reading Miranda if there's a possibility it impacts public safety (e.g. the whereabouts of more bombs?).

He doesn't HAVE to respond, and I'm sure he knows that. Heard a legal expert say that it's a fine line -- they just should go after public safety input and NOT anything having to do with the plot, etc. If they do elicit info before Miranda, they can keep it out of court.

It will be interesting to see what happens.

Just saw that someone said he has suffered "injuries to his throat" which is why he can't communicate right now. They can't arraign him until he CAN communicate, I don't think.

City Lights

(25,171 posts)
8. Does the window (IIRC, 48 hours) start when he was taken into custody,
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:16 PM
Apr 2013

or when they begin interrogations?

gateley

(62,683 posts)
9. I don't know, but I also heard it can be flexible. Not to the extreme --
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:21 PM
Apr 2013

they can't drag it out for months, but I assume to cover situations like this. If a suspect is unconscious, for example, I doubt if the clock would start ticking then.

I'm sure we'll all be experts before too long.

Sunlei

(22,651 posts)
5. for 50 mins only its an American national security thing- after 9/11 many new laws in 10 days .
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:12 PM
Apr 2013

Anyway ABC news tonight said he was "unable to communicate" and medical personal were not allowed to speak to the press.
They should release his exact condition.

Yo_Mama

(8,303 posts)
30. HIPAA rules prevent disclosure of his medical info
Sun Apr 21, 2013, 09:45 AM
Apr 2013

Sorry, but that's federal law.
http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/

The hospital has no legal right to disclose this info to the public. The hostpital can discuss it with the arresting/custodial authority to a certain extent. But absolutely not to the press.

Sunlei

(22,651 posts)
31. thank you for the link to the law..
Sun Apr 21, 2013, 09:56 AM
Apr 2013

Enough details about his condition have been released today. Sounds like he will recover enough to answer some questions soon.

Control-Z

(15,681 posts)
6. If he knows of other bombs
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:13 PM
Apr 2013

planted by him, his brother or other accomplices, or of plans by others to do so, then it would be a threat to law enforcement and the public to allow him to remain silent.

eggplant

(3,891 posts)
12. He's still entitled to remain silent
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:27 PM
Apr 2013

"Miranda" is where, if the suspect tells the cops something prior to being *told* their rights (not *given* their rights) then it is inadmissable in court. For starters, I imagine that there is already more than enough evidence (prior to capturing him) that will convict him, so I'm not worried that the state will lose admissability of any pertinant evitence against him.

The idea behind the delay is to try to get him to cough up information about other people or events before he "remains silent" or has an attorney to advise him. The exception allows anything they find (related to immediate public danger) to still be used against him. That is, it wouldn't be subject to exclusion by Miranda. This isn't anything new in the law -- the exception for public safety has been in place for a while.

It's a procedural gambit by the state, but it is a perfectly legitimate tactic to try to find out if there are other bad guys out there.

 

Leslie Valley

(310 posts)
11. In Canada you don't have a right to legal counsel while being interrogated.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:26 PM
Apr 2013
Police are winning the unceasing war over the rights of suspected criminals on a major battleground - the Supreme Court of Canada.

In a ruling full of friction between a bare majority of judges wanting to avoid hampering officers in their work and a minority fighting for the rights of the accused, the court said on Friday that while suspects have a right to consult a lawyer and to be informed of that right, they don't have a right to legal counsel while they are being interrogated.


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/no-right-to-counsel-during-interrogation-top-court/article1749557/

The ruling said that importing US-style Miranda Rights was not in the interests of Canada.
 

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)
17. Canada practices rather open entrapment, and it's completely legal
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:44 PM
Apr 2013

Their wacky "pretend to be a mafioso" stings are legendary, and totally illegal in the US.

MAD Dave

(204 posts)
26. I knew this....
Sun Apr 21, 2013, 07:36 AM
Apr 2013

.....My Dad's friend was an RCMP officer back in the eighties. The officer made it 100% clear that taking to any cop without a lawyer or representative was stupid. Guilty or not.

24601

(3,940 posts)
32. I recall being assigned to the UK in the early 1980s. During our in-processing, base legal told
Sun Apr 21, 2013, 02:10 PM
Apr 2013

is that if we are picked up by the local (UK) police, call a lawyer and say, "I did it, should I confess?", then don't bother because you just did.

midnight

(26,624 posts)
28. ACLU reminds us that even in difficult times we must not waiver from a tried and true justice
Sun Apr 21, 2013, 08:41 AM
Apr 2013

system....


"The ACLU shares the public's relief that the suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings has been apprehended,” said Anthony D. Romero, ACLU executive director. “Every criminal defendant is entitled to be read Miranda rights. The public safety exception should be read narrowly. It applies only when there is a continued threat to public safety and is not an open-ended exception to the Miranda rule. Additionally, every criminal defendant has a right to be brought before a judge and to have access to counsel. We must not waver from our tried-and-true justice system, even in the most difficult of times. Denial of rights is un-American and will only make it harder to obtain fair convictions.


http://www.aclu.org/organization-news-and-highlights/statement-aclu-executive-director-anthony-d-romero-miranda-rights

 

lobodons

(1,290 posts)
3. John Adams
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:04 PM
Apr 2013

John Adams defended British soldiers in Boston Massacre because he realized importance of a proper defense in our judicial system. (and then we can hang em)

 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
23. Adams gets more credit than your post might imply.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 11:45 PM
Apr 2013

He didn't just provide a pro forma defense to make the system look good, "and then we can hang em". Of the eight British soldiers who were defendants, Adams and the attorneys who worked with him got acquittals for six. The two soldiers who had fired directly into the crowd were convicted, but only on a reduced charge of manslaughter. There were no hangings.

olddad56

(5,732 posts)
7. I think that some publicity hound type defense attorney will end up taking the case.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:15 PM
Apr 2013

seems that there is always some defense attorney that want the free publicity that comes along with taking on a high profile case.

LovingA2andMI

(7,006 posts)
14. He can remain silent....
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:50 PM
Apr 2013

Last edited Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:21 PM - Edit history (1)

White Hat Suspect #2 - The Suspected Mass Murder Terrorist, even without his Miranda Rights being read to him, immediately. He would be WISE to tell about ANY and ALL other bombs and IMMEDIATELY THREATS to other Americans he has knowledge of before the Miranda's Rights are read to him but White Hat Suspect #2 - The Suspected Mass Murder Terrorist has every right not to open his mouth without a lawyer present.

What's sad and upsetting indeed is that White Hat Suspect #2 - The Suspected Mass Murder Terrorist failed to open his mouth and call the darn police officials when either his brother -- Black Hat Suspect #1 - The Suspected Mass Murder Terrorist -- the dead sibling and/or himself plotted to drop bombs (allegedly) near the Boston Marathon Finish Line. If White Hat Suspect #2 - The Suspected Mass Murder Terrorist would have open his darn mouth to have the words, "My Brother is planning to commit a terrorist action on April 15th in Boston" out to Law Enforcement officials, three people at the race would have lived on, 170+ people would not have been injured, a police officer at MIT would still be alive and Watertown, Mass. would not have been on lock-down status all day, yesterday.

So, White Hat Suspect #2 - The Suspected Mass Murder Terrorist can keep remaining silent if he so wish because so far, I see enough evidence he's more likely than is indeed one of the perpetrators of these crimes, without his mouth opening up and words coming out of it.

JimDandy

(7,318 posts)
15. Really? Why isn't
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 08:59 PM
Apr 2013

a private law firm stepping up to provide him the best defense, pro bono? If ever someone needed it, it's this guy.

fleur-de-lisa

(14,615 posts)
18. True dat . . .
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 09:58 PM
Apr 2013

I believe the evidence against him will ultimately be overwhelming, but he deserves the best defense team possible, as would any defendant in the US criminal system.

Curious that no high-profile defense attorney has stepped up to take on his case so far, unless he refused them?

This case, based upon what we know to date, is so wacky that who can say what the stated motivations will be of this kid and his older brother?!?

And yes, I still consider the younger subject as a 'kid' . . . he is still a teenager, and though that does not absolve him of guilt, it puts a different spin on the case.

I don't know the legal implications, but from a psychological standpoint, the influence of his older, 'father-like' brother will likely have an influence on any jury.

I personally don't believe that the influence of his older, radical brother is sufficient reason to let him off for the murder of 4 Americans and the terrorism and mutilation of countless others.

We shall see after the American Justice system has her way . . .

lastlib

(22,978 posts)
22. there might also be a vehicular manslaughter charge against him.....
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 11:39 PM
Apr 2013

....for running over his brother. Wouldn't that be ironic?

fleur-de-lisa

(14,615 posts)
24. Good point . . . I hope so.
Sat Apr 20, 2013, 11:58 PM
Apr 2013

Although it might not mean very much in an American courtroom, I think such a charge would speak volumes to the people in Chechnya . . . 'Chechen teenager runs over idolized older brother during US terrorist attack' . . . what a headline ?!?

And make no mistake, the Chechen rebels will be following this case intensely. Potential future terrorists and all . . .

Not that we should be too terribly concerned, but just saying . . . any future Chechen terrorists will probably be watching.

My advice to them . . . "Go peddle hate somewhere else . . . We're stock full!"

 

John2

(2,730 posts)
29. Attornies do things
Sun Apr 21, 2013, 09:17 AM
Apr 2013

mostly for money, and I would have no doubt if his family was wealthy, He would get a better defense. The evidence is very strong that he did it, but the decision ought to be left up to a jury, what the appropiate penalty would be. There might be some mitigating circumstances and the actual input from the families who lost members of their family. All of that should be weighed after the Trial. His past should be considered also. So far, there is nothing negative in his past.

 

MOTRDemocrat

(87 posts)
27. Good. If we are to treat him equally...
Sun Apr 21, 2013, 07:46 AM
Apr 2013

Then give him a public defender like the majority of Americans unable to afford a good defense attorney.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Public defenders will rep...