In a hair split 5-4 decision the Supreme Court shifted Miranda rules in favor of the police yesterday. Everyone these days is familiar with Miranda and what the police need to require from the suspect before they can question him. The very first warning typically given is "you have a right to remain silent..." Until yesterday, if a criminal suspect, upon hearing those words, said nothing, that could not be considered an effective waiver of his rights and the police could not question. The logic was simple: the burden rests on the government to show that a criminal suspect "knowingly and intelligently" waived his right. Seems simple enough, right?
Well, apparently not to the United States Supreme Court. According to the ruling a suspect must "unambiguously" invoke the right to remain silent. In other words the suspect has to say "yes, I am unambiguously invoking my right to remain silent." Simply remaining quiet (or silent) is not unambiguous, thus the police can begin questioning
This ruling stems from a criminal case involving a man named Van Thompkins. Thompkins was arrested after fatally shooting two men near a mall in Southfield, Michigan. There, when asked whether he wanted to remain silent, Thompkins merely stayed quiet and did not say anything. The police then questioned him for nearly three hours, while Thompkins said nothing. Well, that was until after three hours when finally he admitted the crime. The Appellate Division ruled that this was a violation of Thompkins constitutional rights, because he never waived the right to remain silent. In fact his silence would suggest that he was exercising that very right!
The U.S. Supreme Court overruled the lower court shifting the balance of power to the police and government and not the criminal suspect. Steven Shapiro, legal director of the ACLU, said that this case "demonstrates the power of custodial interrogation to wear down the defendant's willpower, which is what Miranda was designed to prevent."
In her dissent, Justice Sotomayor wrote that this new requirement on the suspect to unambiguously invoke his right to remain silent is counterintuitive because it requires him to speak! Once again the Supremes have gone too far.
Continue reading "Your Miranda Rights Just Got Smaller" »