On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:37 AM, Eric Roberts <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > By changing this, what this does is it allows cops to question and detain > someone without reading them their rights and allows whatever info collected > to be used in court, essentially clipping the gnads off of Miranda in > certain instances. The problem is that the definition of what these > instances are is so vague, it places it open to lots of abuse. That is the > problem with it. It's like getting charged with disorderly conduct...
Admittedly - I haven't really read much detail about the specifics of the change. However, I would think that a standard by which someone is required to be Mirandized or not would quickly develop via case law. The first time a police officer doesn't read Miranda to someone and the court decides they should have, that case will be damaged or tossed. That would serve as the mechanism to prevent abuse. But seriously, I really don't think it will happen anyway. -Cameron ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:317860 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
