Speak up to stay silentFollow

The SCOTUS today ruled that a suspect must implicitly state they are going to remain silent in order to invoke their right (as per Miranda).



I thought this was funny...odd funny as well as haha funny. Funny that this issue came to the SC. The decision isn't surprising to me. I do think it waters down our Miranda rights. How many suspects are going to know to tell their interrogators that they're going to invoke their right to remain silent before simply remaining silent. Simply declaring your silence could implicate you in the eyes of those a bit less discerning.

People do not understand that they can put an end to any police questioning simply by saying they won't answer any questions until they've got a lawyer.

Last time I got arrested, I did know this, and once they started questioning me (after I had provided the necessary administrative information), I told them I wanted a lawyer and was not willing to answer any further questions. That ended it. The "interrogation" lasted all of 2 minutes.

This ruling might be a bit of a blow to civil rights, but honestly if you're going to lead a life of crime you really do need to educate yourself about your basic rights.

I think this ruling actually helps a person's civil rights by making the invocation of their right to remain silent an explicit one. Therefore, there won't be any confusion in the future; if a person says they want to remain silent and not talk to the police that choice is clearly out there and on record and there is no assuming or guessing after the fact.

If my years of watching Law & Order have taught me anything, it's that if a suspect asks for an attorney, the police will still question them while they wait for counsel to arrive. I assume they use provocative statements and questions in the hopes of eliciting an emotional response that will compel the suspect to talk and hopefully (in the eyes of the police) implicate themselves. Now if they have on record the suspect stating they are invoking their right to silence, that interrogation will end because any attorney can point to that moment and declare that anything said thereafter was not admissible.

As Elinda's quote said, I don't think it's much of a big deal to go from "I want a lawyer." to "I want a lawyer, and I wish to remain silent.".

Very true, very true. I guess it would behoove us all to remember that anytime you have dealings with the lay, they are NOT your friends, and its never a good idea to "just explain" things to them. Shut the hell up, and demand an attorney.





If memory serves (and it might not as I'm rather old and have had many a blow to the head), the cops are no longer permitted to question you once you express a desire for an attorney. It might vary from state to state, I don't really know.

From what I've learned on TV, anyone who "lawyers up" only does so since they're guilty.

This.

Does this mean that the Miranda warning now includes a statement about how you have to make a statement in order to keep your Miranda rights?

If I ever decide to turn professional serial killer, I'm going to go by the "I invoke my right to remain silent killer" moniker, just to ***** with the prosecuting attourneys.

I wouldn't say "always", or even "most of the time". We always hear about the guy who's at the wrong place at the wrong time, gets questioned by police, and ends out saying things that come back to bite him, but for every one of those there's probably a hundred people who are questioned by police in connection with various crimes who while technically suspects for having been in the vicinity of a crime, give statements to police that satisfy them and never result in any thing other than perhaps being asked to be a witness later. In every single one of those cases, those people would have significantly hurt themselves legally if they'd refused to talk.

Unless you either did do the crime, or are the prime suspect (and it's obvious to you that nothing you say will convince the police otherwise), barring saying something truly stupid, you're pretty much always going to be better off talking to police. I just think that everyone is focusing on just one sort of interrogation situation, when that's not the most common situation at all.

There is nothing to gain from waiving your Miranda rights other than convenience. You might go through a lot less hassle if you speak freely with officers, but legally you're at a greater risk.

I can't speak for others, but I know I'm not distorting the picture. If I was questioned by the cop in the most typical of circumstances I probably would cooperate very freely, but I know I'm taking a small risk. I'd rather not go through the hassle of wasting time with a lawyer just to answer simple questions and to me the minor risk that I'd be wrongly detained based on free responses is almost immaterial.

If I could give an analogy on my perspective, say you asked a contractor to lay for you a 100 ft² white floor. After he has completed the job I notice two black spots the size of pen point on the floor, and these are the only two spots on an otherwise completely white floor. That floor is not white to me; it is speckled. That doesn't mean I will complain or waste time having him reinstall a new floor, but I am merely stating a factual, categorical truth. The floor is not white; it is speckled.

I'm not suggesting that every time you get pulled over for a traffic violation you ask for a lawyer. What I am stating is that you have the greatest chance of being proven innocent if you do ask for a lawyer. That percent increase may be considered negligible to most people while the time, expense, and irritation may not be, but legally you have nothing to gain by speaking without a lawyer.

To be terse, you can save yourself a lot of hassle by being forthcoming with law enforcement officials, but rarely can you increase the likelihood of being proven innocent by doing so.

Edited, Jun 1st 2010 11:52pm by Allegory

I'm finding it kind of funny how roles have reversed here. Usually, it's gbaji finding the agent of the government to be the bogeyman, when the case isn't so.

This happened recently to someone I know. They were told there was "undeniable evidence" that something had happened, that they had this person on film, "wearing a Titans jersey" blah blah blah. This person doesn't own a Titans jersey, and hasn't done what the police are accusing. Doesn't really seem to matter much to them, they just want the fines, because those fines go directly to the cops in this situation.

I have a lawyer follow me around in case a police officer says hi to me on the street. super convenient.

Once you've been charged with a crime? Shutting up and getting a lawyer is your best choice at that point. The only reason to speak to police interrogators is to convince them that you didn't commit any crime and therefore avoid having charges filed. Once you've been charged, talking further isn't going to help you but absolutely can provide extra information which might aid in getting you convicted.