Is Bin Laden Now Innocent Until Proven Guilty? (America, confessions)

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi Auto,

The OP is confusing war with criminal justice. They're two different things. Enemy soldiers aren't accused of crimes; they're engaged in war and subject only to the rules of war. IMO Bush should have asked Congress to declare war on Al Qaeda. True, it's unprecedented, but so is their existence. They have in effect declared war on us.

Okay, so could our military kill UBL or would they be trampling on his right to a hearing before a federal judge?

[Autodidact]

I don't know what the incompetent bumbling Bush administration policy is, except to leave him alone while they fight the wrong guy, but by me they can kill him and anyone affiliated with Al Qaeda or their allies.

[LittlePinky82]

Originally Posted by Autodidact

Well, not the case directly but the illegally obtained confession. If the case can't be made without it, then the case could then be thrown out because it could not be proven as a result. Lack of Miranda warnings does not in itself directly invalidate a charge.

Yes it does according to my criminal justice book "Criminal Justice in the 21st Century." Also my professor who is a former officer himself.

[LittlePinky82]

Originally Posted by Autodidact

I don't know what the incompetent bumbling Bush administration policy is, except to leave him alone while they fight the wrong guy, but by me they can kill him and anyone affiliated with Al Qaeda or their allies.

And how do you know someone is affiliated with AlQida and their allies? That's why we have a court system. Thomas Jefferson proved that hearsay isn't something the court should go into as the case with Benedict Arnold where he proved one person is not enough to prove someone guilty. There has to be evidence. And don't forget there's all this torture going around as well so confessions taken from the result of torture are thrown out as well.

[Autodidact]

Originally Posted by LittlePinky82

Yes it does according to my criminal justice book "Criminal Justice in the 21st Century." Also my professor who is a former officer himself.

I doubt it. Please quote it. Here's what wiki says:

An incriminating statement by a suspect will not constitute admissible evidence unless the suspect was advised of his or her "Miranda rights" and made a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of those rights.

BTW I am a practicing attorney. It's not the charge that's thrown out, but the confession. If the charge cannot be proved w/o the confession, then it will be thrown out as well. If you are currently taking Criminal Procedure, you will need to learn this for the test.

[Autodidact]

Originally Posted by LittlePinky82

And how do you know someone is affiliated with AlQida and their allies? That's why we have a court system. Thomas Jefferson proved that hearsay isn't something the court should go into as the case with Benedict Arnold where he proved one person is not enough to prove someone guilty. There has to be evidence. And don't forget there's all this torture going around as well so confessions taken from the result of torture are thrown out as well.

Don't think criminal law, think war. When you're shooting at the enemy, you don't give Miranda warnings. You just shoot at the guy on the other side. I'm saying that we should be at war with Al Qaeda. The fact that we're not is just one more piece of Bush administration incompetence.

[LittlePinky82]

Originally Posted by Autodidact

I doubt it. Please quote it. Here's what wiki says:

An incriminating statement by a suspect will not constitute admissible evidence unless the suspect was advised of his or her "Miranda rights" and made a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of those rights.

BTW I am a practicing attorney. It's not the charge that's thrown out, but the confession. If the charge cannot be proved w/o the confession, then it will be thrown out as well. If you are currently taking Criminal Procedure, you will need to learn this for the test.

I'm majoring in criminal justice. I'm not currently taking anything now (summer break) although I have a few criminal justice classes under my belt which I've done VERY well in all of them which I'm proud of obviously. I just recently changed majors from political science not long ago. I took an introductory course to criminal justice and really loved it and changed my major. I want to do either narcotics or homicide. Here's my notes on the case of Miranda rights:

Miranda v Arizona (1966)- Held that police must notify suspects of their rights prior to custodial interrogation no matter what whenever placed in custody. Including asking question's based on the incident. After the warnings have been given the following should be asked: 1) do you understand the rights? 2) knowing the rights do you wish to talk now?

If you don't follow this then you're seriously screwin.

[LittlePinky82]

Originally Posted by Autodidact

Don't think criminal law, think war. When you're shooting at the enemy, you don't give Miranda warnings. You just shoot at the guy on the other side. I'm saying that we should be at war with Al Qaeda. The fact that we're not is just one more piece of Bush administration incompetence.

Then follow the Constitution and declare it. Don't just do it or say it. You have to follow procedure. If you don't than anyone can do whatever they want. Incompetence? LOL. I think you need to research a little thing called B.C.C.I. and financing terrorism. I did a paper on that for my Criminology class last term and got an A so I'm recommending that to you now. I just had a few grammar mistakes. My point is it's not incompetence at all.

[Joe_Stocks]

Hi Auto,

I don't know what the incompetent bumbling Bush administration policy is, except to leave him alone while they fight the wrong guy, but by me they can kill him and anyone affiliated with Al Qaeda or their allies.

But what about their right to a hearing before a federal judge?

[LittlePinky82]

Originally Posted by Joe Stocks

Hi Auto,



But what about their right to a hearing before a federal judge?

In the past whenever the U.S. was involved in some type of battle like this people would seek out American soldiers and give themselves up to them because they knew the Americans would treat them well and be fair and just. Isn't it time we start showing that again?