RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty

RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Aswad -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 4:42:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: Thery are legally allowed to deceive and mislead to attempt to get a confession. What do you think about that? I don't know about him, but I think it effin' sucks, especially since the confession model is the least effective one out there. Trying to pound and wiggle and coerce a square peg into a round hole is data fitting, not data discovery. A superior approach is collecting data points and trying to connect the dots. IWYW, — Aswad.

freedomdwarf1 -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 4:43:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 And then we have President Pantload who spent what,...$2 million to have all his records sealed? I wonder why he did that? Surely he has nothing to hide. Right? It's so sad that you still believe such a thoroughly disproven lie. Whether that be true or not, it has nothing to do with pleading the 5th in a judicial process. So it's irrelevant how much he did or did not spend.

truckinslave -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 4:44:33 PM)
The jury is free to give whatever weight to the behavior of a suspect they want. The police are free (truthfully) to describe that behavior. Are you saying they have to hide the behavior of the suspect? That they cannot truthfully say: "I asked Mr Jones if he killed his wife. He became highly agitated, screamed, banged his head against the table, began to cry, invoked his fifth amendment rights, and asked for his attorney"?

Aswad -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 4:44:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 But the topic was about your right to remain silent so that's the only angle I stole from the 5th [:D] Then consider the points in post #11 and the use of a confession based model of "investigation" (my apologies to actual investigators). Also, without documenting the "evidence", it's essentially worthless. IWYW, — Aswad.

DomKen -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 5:28:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave The jury is free to give whatever weight to the behavior of a suspect they want. The police are free (truthfully) to describe that behavior. Are you saying they have to hide the behavior of the suspect? That they cannot truthfully say: "I asked Mr Jones if he killed his wife. He became highly agitated, screamed, banged his head against the table, began to cry, invoked his fifth amendment rights, and asked for his attorney"? Yes, exactly. The police and prosecuotrs have portrayed grief as guilt and it has gotten innocent men executed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cameron_Todd_Willingham

SilverMark -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 5:50:36 PM)
If I were a suspect of any kind, aside from speeding, jaywalking, etc. I'd shut the hell up, and not speak without an attorney and a damn good one!

truckinslave -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 5:58:14 PM)
You do realize that you just wrote that the police should not be allowed truthfully to report on what they observe? I've said it before: some people want to make it impossible for almost anyone ever to be convicted of anything.

DomKen -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 6:16:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave You do realize that you just wrote that the police should not be allowed truthfully to report on what they observe? I've said it before: some people want to make it impossible for almost anyone ever to be convicted of anything. Did you not read about the case I linked? Basically the police and a witness testified he wasn't upset enough and not overtaken by grief enough. Since every person handles stress and emotional upset differently demeanor in those sorts of situations should not be used against someone. Especially if it is then transmitted by a biased source who believes the emotional outburst or lack of outburst or perceived fake outburst or perceived too little emotion etc. indicates guilt.

Aswad -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 6:31:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave (edited) I've said it before: some people want to make it impossible for almost anyone ever to be [wrongfully] convicted of anything. There. Fixed that for you. IWYW, — Aswad.

truckinslave -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 6:55:22 PM)
I'm talking about principles, not about a one-sided retelling of one particular case. Let me ask you a yes or no question. Let's keep it simple. Should police be allowed truthfully to testify in criminal trials concerning their observations?

Real0ne -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 7:14:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave The jury is free to give whatever weight to the behavior of a suspect they want. The police are free (truthfully) to describe that behavior. Are you saying they have to hide the behavior of the suspect? That they cannot truthfully say: "I asked Mr Jones if he killed his wife. He became highly agitated, screamed, banged his head against the table, began to cry, invoked his fifth amendment rights, and asked for his attorney"? and what FACTS can we conclude from all that? NOTHING! All that is nothing more than beer farts and belches. FACTS are required to prove a case not red faces.

Real0ne -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 7:18:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave The jury is free to give whatever weight to the behavior of a suspect they want. The police are free (truthfully) to describe that behavior. Are you saying they have to hide the behavior of the suspect? That they cannot truthfully say: "I asked Mr Jones if he killed his wife. He became highly agitated, screamed, banged his head against the table, began to cry, invoked his fifth amendment rights, and asked for his attorney"? Yes, exactly. The police and prosecuotrs have portrayed grief as guilt and it has gotten innocent men executed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cameron_Todd_Willingham thats because the standards are a direct result of what level is stoopidity the idjit public will accept. tell ya trial by jury now days can scare the hell out of you. just listen to the people on these boards and the shit they fall for LOL

Real0ne -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 7:31:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aswad quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 I don't see the point in the 5th. [...] So yes, if you exercise your right to remain silent, that implies guilt to me. This is why the 5th amendment needs to be in place: to a lot of people, it's not immediately obvious that it should be. If it had been immediately obvious to the average citizen, there would be no need for the 5th amendment. Note, also, that the 5th amendment covers a variety of legal rights: (a) the right to be tried in front of a jury, (b) the right not to have double jeopardy, (c) the right not to be a witness against yourself, (d) the right to due process and (e) the right to compensation when property is confiscated. Finally, note that the 5th amendment doesn't prohibit anyone from interpreting your silence, though perhaps it should've. IWYW, — Aswad. yeh everyone yammers about the constipation and they quote the federal constipation which has little to nothing to do with municipal and state laws. LE is muni. a city. they have no duty to protect any damn thing BUT the sovereignty of the state. Need to make sure thuggery survives forever and that they remain the biggest mob. yeh, they have no legitimate jurisdiction over anyone but their corporate selves and they have become so entrenched thanks to the average american IQ of 20 good luck getting real justice. Their whole gig is nothing more than a house of cards. At least in england the king rules tongue and cheek (moreso) according to hoyle than we do here. when one examines closely the legal system in america it comprises all the nightmares they used to teach us about the russians in civics class when I was a kid, except lining them up to insure they fall into the pit. government has become one huge rico scam, you can look up X-ATTORNEY GENERAL, now PROFESSOR FINE who when trying obtain legal remedy regarding the corruption they trumped up charges against him and tossed him in jail. People here do not even know the huge amount of political prisoners we have here in america land of the prison. the most hopelessly enslaved are the slaves who think they are free. oh yeh and getting back to the point, you do not have the right to a grand jury indictment for a crime, nor are jurys mandatory for civil cases, nor will they ever recognize your right to declare the 10th. All this needs to be stipulated in the STATE constipations and you do not even have the right to EXERCISE your religion in the state constipations. How does anyone get to that right? The5re is no direct route, you wind up in a 1692 case. these 51 constipations are nice asswipe though.

BamaD -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 7:39:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 FR~ As someone who is neither an American nor lives in the US, I don't see the point in the 5th. A genuine person that hasn't committed any crime has no reason to lie to police and by default, any testimony wouldn't be self-incriminating. But, if they decide to plead the 5th, one can only assume you have something to hide with regard to the case you are being questioned about. So in essence, by pleading the 5th you must be guilty of something otherwise why hide behind it?? There is no sane or logical reason why anyone would need to hide behind the 5th if they had nothing to hide in the first place. So yes, if you exercise your right to remain silent, that implies guilt to me. The only thing missing is the details. Depending on the question s asked they can create the impression of guilt. Often the cops aren't talking to you to clear you, maybe not to set you up, but not to clear you. Having an attorney present is just common sense. Sounds like this guy got convicted of being an idiot.

BamaD -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 7:40:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave I'm talking about principles, not about a one-sided retelling of one particular case. Let me ask you a yes or no question. Let's keep it simple. Should police be allowed truthfully to testify in criminal trials concerning their observations? Of course.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 7:51:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1 FR~ As someone who is neither an American nor lives in the US, I don't see the point in the 5th. A genuine person that hasn't committed any crime has no reason to lie to police and by default, any testimony wouldn't be self-incriminating. But, if they decide to plead the 5th, one can only assume you have something to hide with regard to the case you are being questioned about. So in essence, by pleading the 5th you must be guilty of something otherwise why hide behind it?? There is no sane or logical reason why anyone would need to hide behind the 5th if they had nothing to hide in the first place. So yes, if you exercise your right to remain silent, that implies guilt to me. The only thing missing is the details. You're conflating things, a little bit and since you're not from here, let me help. The "right to remain silent" is a Miranda right (Miranda Vs. Arizona 1960-something). The fifth amendment right is for when one is actually in court, under oath. When being questioned by police, you are not under oath. If you lie in court, the charge is perjury. If you lie while being questioned by police, the charge is not perjury because you've never been sworn in. Your right to remain silent *only* pertains to police questioning and will do you no good in court (you'll probably be found in contempt). Peace and comfort, Michael

truckinslave -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 7:53:56 PM)
Tell Scooter Libby it's okay to lie to police while not under oath.

jlf1961 -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 7:56:41 PM)
Personally, I think the use of truth serum, hypnosis, and prolonged sexual arousal should be used to gain a confession in the case of murder, manslaughter, rape, child molestation, child or spousal abuse, AND lieing to the voters during an election campaign. If no one figures out the tone I used in this....

DaddySatyr -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 7:58:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave Tell Scooter Libby it's okay to lie to police while not under oath. I never said that. I said it was a different charge than perjury. There's filing a false report, obstruction of justice, interfering in an investigation ... but not perjury. Peace and comfort, Michael

jlf1961 -> RE: Your Right to Remain Silent Means You’re Guilty (6/30/2013 8:06:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave Tell Scooter Libby it's okay to lie to police while not under oath. Try telling the truth, providing proof of your information and getting put in jail for 48 hours on an obstruction charge. Some detectives get real pissy when you shoot holes in their theory that completely fucks their case against their chosen suspect.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875