“In a 5-4 decision the Supreme Court ruled today that a potential defendant’s silence canbe used against him if he is being interviewed by police but is not arrested (and read his Miranda rights) and has not verbally invoked the protection of the Fifth Amendment. The case was intended to be about whether prosecutors during a trial could cast aspersions on a defendant’s silence during questioning that took place prior to arrest — prior to the defendent being told he had the right to remain silent. Instead, the Supreme Court determined that they wouldn’t need to rule on the matter because the defendant had never invoked the Fifth Amendment’s protection.”
http://reason.com/blog/2013/06/17/supreme-court-rules-fifth-amendment-has
Related posts:
The Enemy of the NSA is My Friend
Court Eases Prosecutors’ Burden of Proof in Leak Cases
DingXtra - Interview with Ray Kurzweil
IRS Seizes Small Store’s Bank Account. It’s Asset Forfeiture. It’s Legal.
Boy, 12, Fined For WWII Vet Fundraising Efforts
7 Fundamental Conclusions about 2014
Federal Judge Sends U.S. Marshals to Prevent Enforcement Of Trump Travel Ban
Lauryn Hill Ordered by the Court to Undergo “Counseling” Due to her “Conspiracy Theories”
Underestimate the Internet at Your Peril
“Close Guantánamo Prison!” — Karzai’s Ultimatum to Obama
Alabamians Outraged As Civil Asset Forfeitures Soar
5 things you need to know about what’s going on with Saudi Arabia and Qatar
Bill Bonner: Argentina's monetary and economic mismanagement
Reality Check: Is SCOTUS Putting An End To "Personal" Property?
Ohio cop on paid leave after threatening handcuffed family with Taser