Check out my reply here:
http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=329206&postcount=2
Originally Posted by BIG C
From that post:
Eh, I don't think this really changes much by way of your right to remain silent.....Okay, they're saying here that you have to actually speak to them to say "I want to invoke my right to remain silent".....The Supreme Court has long ruled that you have to unequivocally and unambiguously invoke that right.....You can do that by either words or actions.....Either say "I don't want to talk", or simply "SHUT THE FUCK UP ! ! ! ! !.....
You're the practicing lawyer; I'm the dipshit that let his license lapse about 20 years ago (so it's not like you need my support), but FWIW you've said exactly what I've been thinking since this case hit the headlines. At "worst", this legitimizes what the cops have been doing since back when I was practicing (probably long before). Unless you pretty much demand to see a lawyer immediately (and keep demanding,
loudly, until your lawyer arrives), the cops have always been "permitted" to do whatever they can to trick you into starting to talk. And once you start to talk, they can "start" questioning and not stop.
The only mental reservation I have is that I did read that Justice Stevens dissented in this case, and in the last few years I've come to the conclusion that if you want to know what the law
really is, you should see on what side Stevens voted. If he's dissenting, the Supremes fucked up again (that's why I'm going to miss Stevens, J., now I won't know when the Supremes are fucking up).
Cheers,
bcg