http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200...e/glf_woods_accident
Why is this guy being allowed to manipulate the law? The couple that crashed the presidential party is doing the same thing.
Double standards should be a thing of the past.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
Ever heard of constitutional rights? Ya know, they still exist.
What constitutional right allows you to refuse questioning after a possible crime?
I guess you are that dense.
quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:
What constitutional right allows you to refuse questioning after a possible crime?
Are you really a complete idiot?
quote:Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
I guess you are that dense.
When you can't answer, cast an insult. And yet you wonder why.
quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:quote:Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
I guess you are that dense.
When you can't answer, cast an insult. And yet you wonder why.
Can you? oh yea you can google is such a wonderful tool!
quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:quote:Originally posted by Sassy Kims:
I guess you are that dense.
When you can't answer, cast an insult. And yet you wonder why.
This from someone banned under a half dozen user names for insults...
Third graders know the answer to that question...people who don't even live in America know. Don't tell me you don't, unless you're willing to admit it's because you're dense.
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertai...686&cid=ESPNheadline
Looks like Woods is having his way with the cops.
Looks like Woods is having his way with the cops.
what? that he got caught supposely with another woman, by his wife and she was chasing him with a golf club, and caused him to run over a fire hyr. and the hit a tree... i guess the police made all this happen
quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertai...686&cid=ESPNheadline
Looks like Woods is having his way with the cops.
Yep. Having to Go into hiding after you wife smacks you in the kisser with a five iron, then trying to cover it up by claiming it's a private matter...yep...that's having your way with the cops
yup i would hav to agreez with you kims! he justz going to get him a kobe for herz
quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:
What constitutional right allows you to refuse questioning after a possible crime?
5th Amendment....duh
What is the possible crime?
quote:Originally posted by ferrellj:
What is the possible crime?
Is a possible crime even a crime?
Can you imagine, if the thought police really existed, how many man hours it would take to sort through all the personalities inside SJ's head?
quote:Originally posted by mekirk2:
Can you imagine, if the thought police really existed, how many man hours it would take to sort through all the personalities inside SJ's head?
Lol... really!
quote:Originally posted by BFred07:quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:
What constitutional right allows you to refuse questioning after a possible crime?
5th Amendment....duh
Seriously, SJ. You didn't know that?
Woods charged with careless driving. Why was the wife not charged with domestic violence?
More importantly, why were THEY allowed to abuse the system?
For the ill informed...the 5th amendment only applies in the trial phase.
More importantly, why were THEY allowed to abuse the system?
For the ill informed...the 5th amendment only applies in the trial phase.
quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:
Woods charged with careless driving. Why was the wife not charged with domestic violence?
More importantly, why were THEY allowed to abuse the system?
For the ill informed...the 5th amendment only applies in the trial phase.
LMAO!
The Fifth Amendment 'can be asserted in any proceeding, civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory; and it protects against any disclosures which the witness reasonably believes could be used in a criminal prosecution or could lead to other evidence that might be so used.' Kastigar v. U.S., 406 U.S. 441, 44-45 ('72).
http://www.lectlaw.com/def/f083.htm
Study up, what you failed to find in your misinterptretation of the truth was:
Just because a suspect has rights doesn't mean that a suspect knows about those rights. Officers have often used, and sometimes still use, a suspect's ignorance regarding his or her own civil rights to build a case. This all changed with Miranda v. Arizona (1966), the Supreme Court case that created the statement officers are now required to issue upon arrest--beginning with the words "You have the right to remain silent..."
http://civilliberty.about.com/.../p/5th_amendment.htm
Someones 'right to remain silent' is derived directly from the 5th admendment.
Get a clue....
Kirk
quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:
Woods charged with careless driving. Why was the wife not charged with domestic violence?
More importantly, why were THEY allowed to abuse the system?
For the ill informed...the 5th amendment only applies in the trial phase.
And Miranda warnings are given when?
quote:Originally posted by budsfarm:quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:
Woods charged with careless driving. Why was the wife not charged with domestic violence?
More importantly, why were THEY allowed to abuse the system?
For the ill informed...the 5th amendment only applies in the trial phase.
And Miranda warnings are given when?
When a person is being ARRESTED, not QUESTIONED as in this case. I really don't have time to teach you proper procedure. Next time think before you speak!
quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:quote:Originally posted by budsfarm:quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:
Woods charged with careless driving. Why was the wife not charged with domestic violence?
More importantly, why were THEY allowed to abuse the system?
For the ill informed...the 5th amendment only applies in the trial phase.
And Miranda warnings are given when?
When a person is being ARRESTED, not QUESTIONED as in this case. I really don't have time to teach you proper procedure. Next time think before you speak!
And that would be before the trial phase.
Make up your mind. Are you going with Miranda rights or Constitutional rights?
They are entirely different. One is during the arrest, the other is after the arrest.
You are trying to act like they are both the same so you wont look like a fool. Too late!
They are entirely different. One is during the arrest, the other is after the arrest.
You are trying to act like they are both the same so you wont look like a fool. Too late!
quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:
Make up your mind. Are you going with Miranda rights or Constitutional rights?
They are entirely different. One is during the arrest, the other is after the arrest.
You are trying to act like they are both the same so you wont look like a fool. Too late!
Pick one.
http://www.google.com/search?h...cd=4&ved=0CCwQ1QIoAw
Bud, are you still arguing with this idiot? He has clearly been shown that the Miranda rights are derived directly from the 5th amendment.
He pretends that he has me on ignore, yet seems to be able to respond to me directly when it is convenient from him. But when I clearly shoot down his version of the truth with fact, he has nothing to say....
Kirk
He pretends that he has me on ignore, yet seems to be able to respond to me directly when it is convenient from him. But when I clearly shoot down his version of the truth with fact, he has nothing to say....
Kirk
quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:quote:Originally posted by budsfarm:quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:
Woods charged with careless driving. Why was the wife not charged with domestic violence?
More importantly, why were THEY allowed to abuse the system?
For the ill informed...the 5th amendment only applies in the trial phase.
And Miranda warnings are given when?
When a person is being ARRESTED, not QUESTIONED as in this case. I really don't have time to teach you proper procedure. Next time think before you speak!
Wrong.
Fail. Epic fail. Miranda warnings are NOT required for an arrest. They are required before questioning.
Now the idiot thinks Miranda rights and fifth amendment rights are the same. Thats a goodu'..
Absolutely correct. Contrary to what many believe, Miranda warnings are not required at the time of arrest, or at ALL if the defendant isn't questioned. In legal terms, they are required before "custodial interrogation." I have quite a few clients wanting to know if the charges can be dismissed because they weren't read their rights. Of course the answer is no. The purpose of Miranda warnings is to ensure that the defendant is aware of their Fifth Amendment rights before they make a statement/confession. Many of them are so dumb that they make a statement anyway. There is a SIXTH Amendment right to counsel that doesn't attach until "critical stages" of the criminal process, usually after court proceedings have been initiated but that's a whole other issue.
quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:
Now the idiot thinks Miranda rights and fifth amendment rights are the same. Thats a goodu'..
Didn't read the link, did you?
I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt because you certainly couldn't have come away with that opinion if you had.
reread what I said. When a person is arrested they have to be read miranda before questioning.
As in the case with Woods, (which BTW is what we are talking about) No arrest= no miranda, nor fifth amendment rights are required, or being violated.
It is only whemn arrested miranda comes into effect.
It is only during criminal trial that one can plead the fifth.
You failed miserably at trying to save your partner in blue!
As in the case with Woods, (which BTW is what we are talking about) No arrest= no miranda, nor fifth amendment rights are required, or being violated.
It is only whemn arrested miranda comes into effect.
It is only during criminal trial that one can plead the fifth.
You failed miserably at trying to save your partner in blue!
To Lawguy...since you entered the thread.
#1...Would the police questioning Woods be required to give a Miranda warning?
#2...Would he be able to plead the fifth during questioning?
#3...Are Miranda rights the same as the Fifth amendment rights?
#1...Would the police questioning Woods be required to give a Miranda warning?
#2...Would he be able to plead the fifth during questioning?
#3...Are Miranda rights the same as the Fifth amendment rights?
mysterymeat -
Lets see, 'taking the fifth' means that he is taking his 5th amendment right to remain silent:
When a suspect invokes his or her Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, this is referred to in the vernacular as "pleading the Fifth."
http://civilliberty.about.com/.../p/5th_amendment.htm
So, miranda and taking the 5th are the same, just used at different points in the situation. Miranda is only called 'Miranda' because of the court case where it came to be (the defendents name was Miranda.)
Schooled....
Ill send you a bill!
Kirk
Lets see, 'taking the fifth' means that he is taking his 5th amendment right to remain silent:
When a suspect invokes his or her Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, this is referred to in the vernacular as "pleading the Fifth."
http://civilliberty.about.com/.../p/5th_amendment.htm
So, miranda and taking the 5th are the same, just used at different points in the situation. Miranda is only called 'Miranda' because of the court case where it came to be (the defendents name was Miranda.)
Schooled....
Ill send you a bill!
Kirk
"Pleading the 5th" is nothing more than a person exercising their rights against self incrimination. It begins with Miranda which gets its legal basis from the 5th Amendment. To say they are different is to say a father is not related to his biological son.
quote:Originally posted by budsfarm:
"Pleading the 5th" is nothing more than a person exercising their rights against self incrimination. It begins with Miranda which gets its legal basis from the 5th Amendment. To say they are different is to say a father is not related to his biological son.
Ahh...nice try. Yes, they are related. But by no means are the same.
BTWmekirt...you are making yourself look like a fool.
quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:
To Lawguy...since you entered the thread.
#1...Would the police questioning Woods be required to give a Miranda warning?
#2...Would he be able to plead the fifth during questioning?
#3...Are Miranda rights the same as the Fifth amendment rights?
1. Not if he wasn't in custody. That is sometimes an issue, but basically it depends on whether a reasonable person would believe they were free to leave.
2. You don't "plead the fifth" during questioning exactly. You can exercise your right to remain silent or your right to request an attorney. But contrary to your previous post, you can "plead the fifth" in a civil trial as well. As long as there is a chance you could incriminate yourself, you can refuse to answer questions. It also applies to co-defendants, etc.
3. Miranda didn't create any rights. It just clarified what rights a person must be aware of before being interrogated. Also contrary to popular conception, there's no requirement that any exact wording be used. It's just become standardized to make sure the officers don't leave anything out. All the rights enumerated in the warnings come from the Fifth Amendment and other constitutional provisions. There are even some differences between jurisdictions when it comes to the right to counsel. Some will say you will have an attorney appointed "at no charge." In Alabama there is a good possibility that you will eventually pay the fee for an appointed attorney. The Constitution only requires that everyone has an opportunity to have counsel, not necessarily that it be free.
quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:
BTWmekirt...you are making yourself look like a fool.
really, with the actual facts quoted and linked? Or is it all the folks that are agreeing with me? If thats what makes up a fool then so be it. Where does that leave you?
quote:Originally posted by lawguy07:quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:
To Lawguy...since you entered the thread.
#1...Would the police questioning Woods be required to give a Miranda warning?
#2...Would he be able to plead the fifth during questioning?
#3...Are Miranda rights the same as the Fifth amendment rights?
1. Not if he wasn't in custody. That is sometimes an issue, but basically it depends on whether a reasonable person would believe they were free to leave.
2. You don't "plead the fifth" during questioning exactly. You can exercise your right to remain silent or your right to request an attorney. But contrary to your previous post, you can "plead the fifth" in a civil trial as well. As long as there is a chance you could incriminate yourself, you can refuse to answer questions. It also applies to co-defendants, etc.
3. Miranda didn't create any rights. It just clarified what rights a person must be aware of before being interrogated. Also contrary to popular conception, there's no requirement that any exact wording be used. It's just become standardized to make sure the officers don't leave anything out. All the rights enumerated in the warnings come from the Fifth Amendment and other constitutional provisions. There are even some differences between jurisdictions when it comes to the right to counsel. Some will say you will have an attorney appointed "at no charge." In Alabama there is a good possibility that you will eventually pay the fee for an appointed attorney. The Constitution only requires that everyone has an opportunity to have counsel, not necessarily that it be free.
thank you.
quote:Originally posted by Surreal Justice:
thank you.
For?
He just confirmed that the 'miranda' rights that you are talking about are exactly what I said earlier, based on the 5th admendment (particularly the right to remain silent, the exact issue that brought this up), which is exactly what taking the 5th is. Miranda is just the name given to it, based on a past court case.
Duh.
Do you want to confirm for him law guy?