For a bit of comedy relief, an amusing picture commenting on this situation I saw posted elsewhere:
Yeah I was a little off. The bombing was Monday, apparently he attended parties and classes every day after that until Thursday. It’s still bizarre, to do something like that and act like nothing happened. I guess they thought they were going to get away with it and were too stupid to realize that just about every urban center these days is plastered with cameras.
Link: http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/20/us/boston-younger-brother/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
I suspect that he was just looking for a warm place to die.
I’m still confused over the concern regarding the miranda warning. If it’s not made that works against the prosecution.
Maybe not in this case. At best (for the murderer) any testimony obtained before he was Mirandized couldn’t be used against him at a trial. They have ample evidence of his guilt and the reason to question him is to determine whether he had any help, or had planted bombs somewhere. They might lose a conspiracy charge or additional charges for attempted murder, but they have enough for conviction already.
People tend to think they’re subtler and stealthier than they really are, and that the level of monitoring can’t possibly be as much as it really is. Helps catch a whole lot of criminals.
The fascinating thing about it is that we are in a surveillance culture that emanates not from the government authorities but from our fellow citizens and merchants - witness the terabytes of video and photos that flooded the Task Force once they asked anyone who may have been filming near the blast sites to share their shots; much, likely most, of the security cam footage was not police cameras but those of private businesses. Just because there are not signs at every streetpost with “Big Brother Is Watching!” and police stopping random passerby to ask for papers doesn’t mean nobody is paying attenton.
Anything he says without a Miranda warning cannot be used as evidence in his trial. There is already a preponderance of evidence against him, and so anything he says now, without being read his rights, is a moot point.
So, by not reading him his rights, that means he is not entitled to remain silent, nor is he entitled immediately to a lawyer.
He can be tried on existing evidence only, and anything he says from this point forward cannot be used in his trial, but could help prevent further terrorist activities.
That’s my dumb Canadian interpretation of the law.
I guess I should re-phrase: it’s not so bizarre that this guy tried to act normal in the hopes of not getting caught…it’s just that he was able to. There’s no way I could do that if I were to ever commit such a heinous act (I won’t!).
In the now classic Dunning and Kruger study “Unskilled and Unaware of it” one of their examples is relevant IMHO:
http://www.cognizancemagazine.com/unskilled-unaware-dunning-kruger/
I do think that there were several “but I wore the juice!” moments coming from the bombers.
Doesn’t reading the Miranda rights just make the suspect aware of his rights? They don’t actually grant any rights. They are still his rights whether or not they read them to him. He can still remain silent and still has the right to an attorney. I thought the reading of the rights was just to avoid the issue of the suspect saying a lot of stuff and then later saying he didn’t know he could have remained silent or had an attorney.
I’m watching “48 Hours” now and they are reporting that according to doctors the throat wound in Dzhokhar Tzarnaev’s throat that is preventing him from speaking appears to be an exit wound in the back of his throat. Indicating that the bullet may have entered his mouth, suggesting that he may have stuck a gun into his mouth and attempted to commit suicide.
Typically, they break things down into sectors, each sector of which has natural boundaries and few access points to other sectors.
That is also my understanding: reading someone their Miranda rights does not grant those rights, it informs them of them.
Ah, that makes sense. When all that was happening, my fiancé and I were listening to the police scanner and one of the officers mentioned a “Code 17”, which we looked up and found out was “attempted suicide”.
Fuck him if he never speaks again. The evidence as we understand it is overwhelmingly against him and his brother. Which makes their Father’s claim of them being framed all the more laughable.
AFAIK the exception is to the rules for using answers given without the warning, not to the rights themselves. He still has the right to remain silent, but they just don’t have to tell him. If they’re correct that the public safety exception applies, his answers can be used against him.
Well at least he tried to do one smart thing in his short life.
Well yes but it would be nice to know if he had friends in low places.
Well yes but it would be nice to know if he had friends in low places. It’s important that we learn the background of how this all came about. It helps the FBI refine their ability to profile other people planning the same thing.
Does the fact that he is right now in a world-class hospital, receiving the best care that can be provided to him, doctors and nurses working around the clock to try to save his life, after he killed four innocent people and injured dozens more this week say anything to show the world we are different?
Miranda warnings need to be read before custodial interrogations, if any statements made during the custodial interrogation are going to be presented in court against the person being interrogated. A custodial interrogation is one in which the person being interrogated can’t leave. There is no requirement to read Miranda warnings upon arrest.