Lets add provision to Miranda warning

[CARLHAYDEN]

Most of you know that when arresting a person for a serious criminal offense, law enforcement must tell the arrested of his rights pursuant to the Miranda case.

It seems to me that considering the volume of serious crime committed by aliens and the international obligations, that every arrested for a serious crime should as part of the Miranda warning be advised that if an alien, he/she has the right to speak with a representative of his government.

Those who request to speak with a representative (typically consular officer) should have their legal status checked, and those not legally present in this country should be subject to deportation.

Those who do not request to have such a representative present will have been considered to have waived their right with respect to appeals.

[J. J.]

Most of you know that when arresting a person for a serious criminal offense, law enforcement must tell the arrested of his rights pursuant to the Miranda case.

It seems to me that considering the volume of serious crime committed by aliens and the international obligations, that every arrested for a serious crime should as part of the Miranda warning be advised that if an alien, he/she has the right to speak with a representative of his government.

Those who request to speak with a representative (typically consular officer) should have their legal status checked, and those not legally present in this country should be subject to deportation.

Those who do not request to have such a representative present will have been considered to have waived their right with respect to appeals.

First, I've yet to see that "volume."

Second, as far as I know, police can check the alien status of anyone arrested, whether or not they make the request.

Third, why are you so worried about abridging due process?  You are basically setting up a situation where the police can just deport anyone, without any appeals.  What it the police simply make a mistake?

[??????????]

Lets be rid of the Miranda warning all together.

[Хahar 🤔]

Lets be rid of the Miranda warning all together.

You don't think people should know their rights?

[??????????]

Lets be rid of the Miranda warning all together.

You don't think people should know their rights?

People shouldn't be that ignorant of the law in the first place.

[Хahar 🤔]

Lets be rid of the Miranda warning all together.

You don't think people should know their rights?

People shouldn't be that ignorant of the law in the first place.

But that unrealistic.

[Verily]

Lets be rid of the Miranda warning all together.

You don't think people should know their rights?

People shouldn't be that ignorant of the law in the first place.

Clearly we need more comprehensive public schools.

[Stranger in a strange land]

no, the warning is fine as it is. A consul can't provide a get out of jail free card, and the assistance that a consular officer can provide is VERY limited, contrary to popular belief. A consular officer cannot represent an accused person in court, nor i believe, can they sit in during interrogations.

[??????????]

Lets be rid of the Miranda warning all together.

You don't think people should know their rights?

People shouldn't be that ignorant of the law in the first place.

Clearly we need more comprehensive public schools.

Actually, we do. Public schools these days teach nothing. Hell, they don't even have shop, home economics and they don't even teach you how to balance a check book. Especially since most inner city schools in our country are producing criminals anyways, they should perhaps have a class that flirts with basic constitutional law.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Most of you know that when arresting a person for a serious criminal offense, law enforcement must tell the arrested of his rights pursuant to the Miranda case.

It seems to me that considering the volume of serious crime committed by aliens and the international obligations, that every arrested for a serious crime should as part of the Miranda warning be advised that if an alien, he/she has the right to speak with a representative of his government.

Those who request to speak with a representative (typically consular officer) should have their legal status checked, and those not legally present in this country should be subject to deportation.

Those who do not request to have such a representative present will have been considered to have waived their right with respect to appeals.

First, I've yet to see that "volume."

Second, as far as I know, police can check the alien status of anyone arrested, whether or not they make the request.

Third, why are you so worried about abridging due process?  You are basically setting up a situation where the police can just deport anyone, without any appeals.  What it the police simply make a mistake?

JJ,

First, I am well aware that you are blind to things you do not want to see.

Second, there are a number of cases were defendants who are foreign nationals whohave appealed to the World Court where they were not apprised of their right (under international treaty) to consult  with a consular representative of the country of which they are a citizen.  Now, if the United States does not adhere to international law in this context, we can expect other nations to arrest, try and convict American citizens without allowing them to speak with American consular officials.

Third, I don't know what you are imbibing, but there was absolutely no statement or even implication pm my part that "You are basically setting up a situation where the police can just deport anyone, without any appeals."

[Stranger in a strange land]

Most of you know that when arresting a person for a serious criminal offense, law enforcement must tell the arrested of his rights pursuant to the Miranda case.

It seems to me that considering the volume of serious crime committed by aliens and the international obligations, that every arrested for a serious crime should as part of the Miranda warning be advised that if an alien, he/she has the right to speak with a representative of his government.

Those who request to speak with a representative (typically consular officer) should have their legal status checked, and those not legally present in this country should be subject to deportation.

Those who do not request to have such a representative present will have been considered to have waived their right with respect to appeals.

First, I've yet to see that "volume."

Second, as far as I know, police can check the alien status of anyone arrested, whether or not they make the request.

Third, why are you so worried about abridging due process?  You are basically setting up a situation where the police can just deport anyone, without any appeals.  What it the police simply make a mistake?

JJ,

First, I am well aware that you are blind to things you do not want to see.

Second, there are a number of cases were defendants who are foreign nationals whohave appealed to the World Court where they were not apprised of their right (under international treaty) to consult  with a consular representative of the country of which they are a citizen.  Now, if the United States does not adhere to international law in this context, we can expect other nations to arrest, try and convict American citizens without allowing them to speak with American consular officials.

Third, I don't know what you are imbibing, but there was absolutely no statement or even implication pm my part that "You are basically setting up a situation where the police can just deport anyone, without any appeals."

any such case before the world court will go nowhere: the help a consular officer can provide is limited to explaining the local legal system to the accused, notifying the family of the situation, and facilitating communication with the home country. If they were actually denied the right to speak with a consular officer, that's a different matter, but I don't imagine it would be any of the world court's business even in that case. In fact I'm not even sure how a case within the US criminal justice system could even be appealed to the World Court. When you enter another country, you are subject to that country's jurisdiction, and no-one credible would argue otherwise.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Stranger,

Please review Article VI of the Constitution of the United States with respect to the force (supremacy) of treaties.

Then review Article 36 of the Vienna Convention which was ratified by the United States on Nobemver 29, 1969.

[Stranger in a strange land]

Stranger,

Please review Article VI of the Constitution of the United States with respect to the force (supremacy) of treaties.

Then review Article 36 of the Vienna Convention which was ratified by the United States on Nobemver 29, 1969.

all this says is that consular officials have the right to visit citizens of their countries who are accused or imprisoned. It doesn't specify the course of appeal if this is not done. I would suspect that if an accused alien were found guilty and had not known to ask to speak to consular officers, the case would be appealed through the US criminal justice system. In no way does this constitute a violation of the treaty: I doubt most other countries even have equilvalents to Miranda warnings.

can you cite a specific istance of the world court overturning a ruling in the US criminal justice system?

In any event, I suspect this whole argument is moot: an illegal alien would not ask for access to their consul if they knew that doing so was likely do get them deported.

[CARLHAYDEN]

First, please check the Avena case, decided by the International Court of Justice on March 31, 2004.

Second, illegal aliens have devised a method of avoiding deportation by concocting police brutality stories under the supervision of Mexican Consuls.

Third, aliens are seeking to have sentences overturned based on failure to be advised of right to consult Consul.

[Stranger in a strange land]

First, please check the Avena case, decided by the International Court of Justice on March 31, 2004.

Second, illegal aliens have devised a method of avoiding deportation by concocting police brutality stories under the supervision of Mexican Consuls.

Third, aliens are seeking to have sentences overturned based on failure to be advised of right to consult Consul.

I find it a little amusing that you think Mexicans need the aid of their consular officials to come up with sob stories about police brutality. Lots people try to do this (usually unsuccessfully), not just Mexicans.

Anyway, I don't really like the idea of lengthening the Miranda warning by adding provisions addressed to specific groups of people. Also, a lot of the people you're referring to don't speak English, so even if the warning were changed, they still could claim ignorance. Do you think the warning should also be given in Spanish or other languages?

[J. J.]

Most of you know that when arresting a person for a serious criminal offense, law enforcement must tell the arrested of his rights pursuant to the Miranda case.

It seems to me that considering the volume of serious crime committed by aliens and the international obligations, that every arrested for a serious crime should as part of the Miranda warning be advised that if an alien, he/she has the right to speak with a representative of his government.

Those who request to speak with a representative (typically consular officer) should have their legal status checked, and those not legally present in this country should be subject to deportation.

Those who do not request to have such a representative present will have been considered to have waived their right with respect to appeals.

First, I've yet to see that "volume."

Second, as far as I know, police can check the alien status of anyone arrested, whether or not they make the request.

Third, why are you so worried about abridging due process?  You are basically setting up a situation where the police can just deport anyone, without any appeals.  What it the police simply make a mistake?

JJ,

First, I am well aware that you are blind to things you do not want to see.

Karl, the K and two others are deserved, while you have posted isolated incidents, occasionally, there is no great "volume of serious crime committed by aliens."

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So far as I can tell, the police can check alien status.  If they wish to contact consul, they may, or the police, after establishing that they are alien, can inform then that they may.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is a bit like saying, "If someone attempts to call an attorney, they can be convicted without appeal."  Under your scenario, someone eligible to stay in the county, may be picked up, determined not to have committed a crime, determined to be eligible to stay in the country (with an appeal), and then deported.  That is an abridgment of due process.

[CARLHAYDEN]

First JJ, I understand that when you have no cogent argument to make, you engage in name calling.  This is very childish of you/

Second, I would like to see the Uniform Crime Reports include a category for persons arrested for commission of murder or nonnegligent manslaughter by status (citizen, legal aliens, illegal alien).  Unfortunately at this time the FBI does not provide this data.  Would you like to have this categorization included in the UCR?

Third, you really need to reread my original post as you seem to have completely misunderstood it.  As I noted, persons arrested for serious crimes would be provided with the enhanced Miranda warning.  The scenario you alledged is completely and totally bogus.  There was NO abridgement suggested in my post!

[J. J.]

First JJ, I understand that when you have no cogent argument to make, you engage in name calling.  This is very childish of you/

Second, I would like to see the Uniform Crime Reports include a category for persons arrested for commission of murder or nonnegligent manslaughter by status (citizen, legal aliens, illegal alien).  Unfortunately at this time the FBI does not provide this data.  Would you like to have this categorization included in the UCR?

No, an accurate description of a xenophobe.

Now, I have, using your "logic" a much stronger group of criminals, people involved in the country music business.  I just read about the father of Cheri Otari being murdered by country song writer. 

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20195882,00.html?xid=rss-topheadlines

Now, obviously we have people like Merle Haggard, Gary US Bonds, Mindy McCready, Weylan Jennings, Willie Nelson, and, of course Johnny Cash, and his stepdaughter Carlene Carter.

Obviously me much stop this cadre of country criminals, these homicidal honkytonk hillbillies!  Oh, I forgot, there white and speak English.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The fact that they are currently illegal, might change after adjudication.  You would deny that possibility.

[CARLHAYDEN]

First JJ, I understand that when you have no cogent argument to make, you engage in name calling.  This is very childish of you/

Second, I would like to see the Uniform Crime Reports include a category for persons arrested for commission of murder or nonnegligent manslaughter by status (citizen, legal aliens, illegal alien).  Unfortunately at this time the FBI does not provide this data.  Would you like to have this categorization included in the UCR?

No, an accurate description of a xenophobe.

Now, I have, using your "logic" a much stronger group of criminals, people involved in the country music business.  I just read about the father of Cheri Otari being murdered by country song writer. 

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20195882,00.html?xid=rss-topheadlines

Now, obviously we have people like Merle Haggard, Gary US Bonds, Mindy McCready, Weylan Jennings, Willie Nelson, and, of course Johnny Cash, and his stepdaughter Carlene Carter.

Obviously me much stop this cadre of country criminals, these homicidal honkytonk hillbillies!  Oh, I forgot, there white and speak English.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The fact that they are currently illegal, might change after adjudication.  You would deny that possibility.

Yes, JJ engages in ad hominen arguments rather than deals with facts or logic.

Oh, and once again, aliens illegally present in this country would not lose any rights to adjucication under my proposal.

Oh, and I note for the record, you ignored my proposal that the FBI include the categories I cited.  Guess you don't want to deal with data either.

[J. J.]

First JJ, I understand that when you have no cogent argument to make, you engage in name calling.  This is very childish of you/

Second, I would like to see the Uniform Crime Reports include a category for persons arrested for commission of murder or nonnegligent manslaughter by status (citizen, legal aliens, illegal alien).  Unfortunately at this time the FBI does not provide this data.  Would you like to have this categorization included in the UCR?

No, an accurate description of a xenophobe.

Now, I have, using your "logic" a much stronger group of criminals, people involved in the country music business.  I just read about the father of Cheri Otari being murdered by country song writer. 

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20195882,00.html?xid=rss-topheadlines

Now, obviously we have people like Merle Haggard, Gary US Bonds, Mindy McCready, Weylan Jennings, Willie Nelson, and, of course Johnny Cash, and his stepdaughter Carlene Carter.

Obviously me much stop this cadre of country criminals, these homicidal honkytonk hillbillies!  Oh, I forgot, there white and speak English.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The fact that they are currently illegal, might change after adjudication.  You would deny that possibility.

Yes, JJ engages in ad hominen arguments rather than deals with facts or logic.

Oh, and once again, aliens illegally present in this country would not lose any rights to adjucication under my proposal.

Oh, and I note for the record, you ignored my proposal that the FBI include the categories I cited.  Guess you don't want to deal with data either.

No KKKarl, I cite the fallacy of your posts, and perhaps a racial subtext. 

What you won't admit that someone can enter the country illegally, a refugee, but can have grounds for being granted legal status.  I havbe no problem with those people seeking to appeal.

[CARLHAYDEN]

JJ,

You have yet to cite any fallacy in my posts.

You have however engaged in extensive name calling (ad hominem attacks).

You have also declined to answer my challenge on UCR statistics.

[J. J.]

Yes, JJ engages in ad hominen arguments rather than deals with facts or logic.

You don't post facts; you post your own, opinion, and try to pass it off as a fact.  That you engage in an ad hominem, by claiming that I "blind to things you do not want to see." 

So, we see the start of KKKarlHayden's ad hominem.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You don't seem to understand that someone may enter the country illegally, and still be legally entitled to legal status.  You proposal would prevent that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, I don't have an objection, but I'm not the director of the FBI, so there is very little that I can do about it.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Yes, JJ engages in ad hominen arguments rather than deals with facts or logic.

You don't post facts; you post your own, opinion, and try to pass it off as a fact.  That you engage in an ad hominem, by claiming that I "blind to things you do not want to see." 

So, we see the start of KKKarlHayden's ad hominem.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You don't seem to understand that someone may enter the country illegally, and still be legally entitled to legal status.  You proposal would prevent that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, I don't have an objection, but I'm not the director of the FBI, so there is very little that I can do about it.

First, as to facts, I suggest you read the Avena case.  Or are you suggesting that I made that up?

Second, nothing in my proposal would prevent aliens in this country from appealing their status.  You have yet to cite any basis for your opinion that my proposal would have this effect.

[J. J.]

First, as to facts, I suggest you read the Avena case.  Or are you suggesting that I made that up?

I just posted a few country western types that have criminal some criminal activities, so please don't cherry pick cases.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This:

Those who do not request to have such a representative present will have been considered to have waived their right with respect to appeals.

Wanna try again?

[CARLHAYDEN]

You totally misconstrued what I said by taking it out of context!

The "right" which would be "lost" would be the right to consult with a consul of their country, which they would lose only if they declined the offer to consult with that entity.

Its sort of like offering a person a chance to speak with an attorney, and when they decline, they can be questioned.

Do you really not understand this, or are you playing dumb?