Catch us live on BlogTalkRadio every



Tuesday & Thursday at 6pm P.S.T.




Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Let's Condemn the Media for Equating Assertion of Miranda with a Guilty Plea.

OFF THE WIRE
Remember the "run away bride'? Remember nobody knew where she was?
Remember all of the stupid ass self centered talk shows...the one that comes
to mind is Nancy Grace...The husband (to be) refused to answer a whole lot
of questions, refused to take a lie detector test....all the buffoons in TV
land said he must be guilty...then poof the little missing bride to be pops
up.
Hi Mac,
I agree completely. The police, the prosecutors and the media have combined to assault and undermine our Constitutional/Miranda right to "lawyer up" as they disdainfully call it. And as the result, whenever anyone asserts their rights against self incrimination or their right to consult counsel there is a rush to judgment that the person is guilty, as commonly occurs on this horrifying Nancy Grace show you mentioned. The parents of JonBenet Ramsay are an example. They were convicted in the public's mind immediately upon their having consulted counsel. They lived under that umbrella of guilt for so many many years, including by the cops who wanted to bring them to trial for murder, one media savvy cop so incensed by the prosecutors refusal to prosecuted them that he quit the force escalating the public assurance that the Ramsay's were guilty. Then they were cleared by the DNA. The lesson for the public was, "Well, if they had just explained their innocence to the police they would have been cleared at the outset." Bull-fucking-shit. If they had talked to the police, the investigators, with their mind set, would only have sought something, anything, even a minor inconsistency, to allege that they "changed their story." And if they didn't find an inconsistency, they would condemn the Ramsays for too much consistency, which they would have spun into an allegation of contrived testimony. Either way their reputations would have been further ruined and their likelihood of being prosecuted and convicted increased. Another recent example is the case of the Duke La crosse players who "lawyered up" after being accused of rape and then had to endure months of media condemnation, and the assumption from having asserted their rights that they "must be guilty." Luckily these are folks who only had to endure public humiliation and disdain. Consider all the good men who lie in prison convicted of crimes they didn't commit, only because they submitted to sleepless days of interrogation at the hands of cops who were already convinced that they were guilty. In one case I recall - although I'm ashamed that I can't remember the names of the kids - the police obtained detailed confessions from 5 kids that they committed a murder together, with details only the killers (and cops) could know; only to find later that evidence established that others were guilty of the crime.
There are good cops and bad cops, but one should never talk to any cop. This is what I've taught my children since they were very young. The California State Bar issued a brochure on what parents should teach their kids about the law and the police and the brochures said the same thing, demand your parents participation and insist on a lawyer. Some months or years ago one of our BOLT members sent around a video of a law professor's lecture on asserting the client's rights whenever contacted by the police, particularly if the client is not guilty. I wish whoever sent around that video would send it to Jan so that folks can see that this is a position that is held not just by rights advocates but just generally in the legal profession. "Just say NO, to cops who want to interrogate you with regard to a crime."
I think that the press also needs to be educated that it is only saps who submit to police interrogation. The police and prosecutors seem to have no counterweight in their constant barrage of media statements that we can assume from a man's having "lawyered up" that he is guilty. I doubt that anyone could convince Nancy Grace, as you mentioned, but it really is reprehensible that those pretending to be the legitimate media, from Fox to Oberman, can't seem to recognize that the assertion of our Constitutional rights must never be permitted to be equated with a plea of guilty. All those who participate in perpetuating this equation chip away, day by day, at the beauty and high principles founding our Constitutional right against self-incrimination and the lessons of Miranda.

Ray