In a recent Supreme Court decision that did not get much attention from the press, the Supreme Court has challenged the right to remain silent under both the Fifth Amendment and the Miranda rights.
In Texas v. Salinas, the Supreme Court (along political lines) decided that the right to remain silent had to be expressly invoked. Since Salinas did not expressly say that he wished to remain silent his behavior when silent was introduced to the jury and upheld. This has massive implications because questioning by police can often be nerve-wracking and even the most innocent person would tend to act in a nervous manner.
This means that prosecutors throughout the United States may now comment on how a defendant did not proclaim their innocence and to further lead defendants into traps of making statements that may be against their interests or misconstrued.
Please let me know what you think about this issue and what is the best way to resolve a conflict in a justice system that is increasingly adversarial and pro-state.
In Texas v. Salinas, the Supreme Court (along political lines) decided that the right to remain silent had to be expressly invoked. Since Salinas did not expressly say that he wished to remain silent his behavior when silent was introduced to the jury and upheld. This has massive implications because questioning by police can often be nerve-wracking and even the most innocent person would tend to act in a nervous manner.
This means that prosecutors throughout the United States may now comment on how a defendant did not proclaim their innocence and to further lead defendants into traps of making statements that may be against their interests or misconstrued.
Please let me know what you think about this issue and what is the best way to resolve a conflict in a justice system that is increasingly adversarial and pro-state.
RSS Feed
