Is The Surviving Boston Marathon Terrorist an "Enemy Combatant?"

[Centexfarmer]

It appears he won't be read his 'Miranda rights' until after extensive questioning, if at all.
Oh dear, here we go again.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/20/boston-marathon-dzhokhar-tsarnaev-mirnada-rights

That was an informative read.

Here's the crux of the question:

Leave aside the fact that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev has been convicted of nothing and is thus entitled to a presumption of innocence. The reason to care what happens to him is because how he is treated creates precedent for what the US government is empowered to do, including to US citizens on US soil. When you cheer for the erosion of his rights, you're cheering for the erosion of your own.

Apparently what Senator Graham is calling for is exactly what the Obama DOJ is planing on doing, and with the law on their side.

 

[Benvolio]

That was an informative read.

Here's the crux of the question:



Apparently what Senator Graham is calling for is exactly what the Obama DOJ is planing on doing, and with the law on their side.

Remember that the Miranda warning is not a Constitutional right, but was created by the Warren Court, and contains the exception when necessary for protecting the public. Utilizing the exception is not a denial of the Constitutional right to remain silent.

 

[Benvolio]

Desegregation and interracial marriage were based on interpretations of the Constitution. Miranda was not. It was court legislation. If the court upholds the applicability of the public safety exception, any of his statements will be admissible without the warning. No doubt the prosecutor has decided there is enough evidence without a confession in any event, and has decided that learning what he knows is critical.

 

[Polydeuces]

http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_new...errogation-of-the-boston-bombing-suspect?lite

The rule waiving the Miranda warning does not set a precise limit on how long a suspect can be interrogated before being advised of his rights, but it likely buys authorities no more than 48 hours.

During that time Tsarnaev, 19, will be questioned by a federal government team called the High Value Detainee Interrogation Group, consisting of officials of the FBI, CIA and Defense Department. Though he will not have a lawyer present, any statements he makes during the questioning will be admissible in court.

 

[palbert]

I don't see that reading him his Miranda rights presents that much of an obstacle.

First, not giving them guts the presumption of innocence to which we must at least give lip service.

Second, it could be argued that his capture negatives any imminent threat to public safety, making the exception inapplicable.

Third, I am not so sure the public safety exception is so well settled as to not present a hurdle.

Fourth, if an aggressive interrogator exceeds the "public safety" limits and tries to "gild the lilly" he jeopardizes the entire reason for withholding the rights.

The gain does not warrant jeopardizing the integrity of the prosecution.

Further the incentive for him to talk is compelling him, and any lawyer, to talk, if only to gain some slight consideration, even if so slight as the location of incarceration.

 

[Benvolio]

The big danger is that ,if he is given the warning ,he will not disclose what he knows, if anything, about other groups and individuals who may be planning further terror. That consideration far, far outweighs any benefit from a confession. There is probably enough evidence without it.

 

[JayHawk]

So was desegregation and interracial marriage rights, but who established the Miranda warning is neither here nor there.

If the feds don't give it, they cannot use his subsequent testimony in court. If you want life imprisonment for this guy, or the death penalty, I would be rooting for the Miranda warning as soon as possible.

I don't see that reading him his Miranda rights presents that much of an obstacle.

First, not giving them guts the presumption of innocence to which we must at least give lip service.

Second, it could be argued that his capture negatives any imminent threat to public safety, making the exception inapplicable.

Third, I am not so sure the public safety exception is so well settled as to not present a hurdle.

Fourth, if an aggressive interrogator exceeds the "public safety" limits and tries to "gild the lilly" he jeopardizes the entire reason for withholding the rights.

The gain does not warrant jeopardizing the integrity of the prosecution.

Further the incentive for him to talk is compelling him, and any lawyer, to talk, if only to gain some slight consideration, even if so slight as the location of incarceration.

See I dont think so. I agree it should be a short lived and then he should be read miranda.

However, any court in the country upon seeing the video of him leaving the thingy that goes boom will convict him. It really is that simple. That alone is life. The fact that he was involved in a shoot out where a bullet from a cops gun was found in his neck is pretty damning but not conclusive. If any of the cops who saw him can identify his face and attire then that is damning as well.

On that note I imagine they will seek the death penalty. Often times I am against it just because it cost more than LIFE in jail.

But in his case, being young and a national terrorist, he would be in protective population. So for me.... the idea of living a nice long life in utter hell of isolation and one hour a day exercise is the perfect punishment for having stole those families relatives and altered those other folks lives forever. He should be punished for as long as he can draw breath.

 

[Jack Springer]

Massachusetts does not have the death penalty. The US Government does.

The question is if Obama (fellow young 'choomer') and Holder have the guts to go for it.

It will be interesting to see how all this plays out. Obama and Holder have a history of not wanting to offend Muslims.

 

[JayHawk]

Massachusetts does not have the death penalty. The US Government does.

The question is if Obama (fellow young 'choomer') and Holder have the guts to go for it.

It will be interesting to see how all this plays out.

Well there is little to no question that he will be tried federally. As the investigation is under the auspices of a US District Attorney.


So you think a painless nighty night is the appropriate solution? What a nice way to treat those who have caused so much pain.

 

[Rolyo85]

The big danger is that ,if he is given the warning ,he will not disclose what he knows, if anything, about other groups and individuals who may be planning further terror. That consideration far, far outweighs any benefit from a confession. There is probably enough evidence without it.

So we should trump rights in the name of national security? You know who did that? Soviet era communist dictatorships.

 

[Rolyo85]

Well there is little to no question that he will be tried federally. As the investigation is under the auspices of a US District Attorney.

So you think a painless nighty night is the appropriate solution? What a nice way to treat those who have caused so much pain.

What is this - the Middle Ages? Why the bloodlust?

 

[chance1]

It's the classic death penalty

If not now then never

 

[Benvolio]

So we should trump rights in the name of national security? You know who did that? Soviet era communist dictatorships.

We understand. He only killed Americans. The "rights" of the immigrant are more important. So what if hundreds of more Americans are killed by his buddies?

 

[palbert]

The big danger is that ,if he is given the warning ,he will not disclose what he knows, if anything, about other groups and individuals who may be planning further terror. That consideration far, far outweighs any benefit from a confession. There is probably enough evidence without it.

He might know of others who might have the capacity to and might actually do something at an unknown sometime in the future.

How is that an immediate threat to public safety?

 

[chance1]

^ because they could act

Immediately

 

[JayHawk]

What is this - the Middle Ages? Why the bloodlust?

I believe in punishment. Do you believe he should be redeemed?

I think he ended the life of four people, he altered those families lives forever and the over 180 injured in his plot. I think that much suffering deserves justice and for me justice is sitting in a prison cell for the next sixty years rotting on the inside.

I stand for the freedom of this country and want nothing but pain for those who would cause harm to my fellow people.

So no not the middle ages. The NOW!

What is it you suggest? He is either going to die in ten years or rot in jail for life. Or if he is lucky he will die in the hospital.

 

[palbert]

^ because they could act

Immediately

I don't think "could" cuts it.

Public safety is probably more imperiled by the NRA than this guy and his friends.

 

[Benvolio]

I don't think "could" cuts it.

Public safety is probably more imperiled by the NRA than this guy and his friends.

The fact that two members of the probable conspiracy have acted satisfies the requirement of immediacy. If they were prepared to act their accomplices are without doubt prepared to act.

 

[JayHawk]

The fact that two members of the probable conspiracy have acted satisfies the requirement of immediacy. If they were prepared to act their accomplices are without doubt prepared to act.

Please share the news of the collaborators... I have heard of nothing on the news. I am sure the authorities would be interested as well.

 

[palbert]

The fact that two members of the probable conspiracy have acted satisfies the requirement of immediacy. If they were prepared to act their accomplices are without doubt prepared to act.

You obviously have information that would be of benefit to the FBI. Can you share it with us?