Comments on: Glenn Beck vehemently defends mirandizing suspected Times Square bomber on Fox and Friends

By: Kent Sjolund

Kent Sjolund — Thu, 06 May 2010 00:44:10 +0000

Under the “Public Safety act” they CAN delay Mirandizing the suspect but I'm NOT sure if that would matter. Until we can define “torture” then it's all moot anyway.

By: Kent Sjolund

Kent Sjolund — Thu, 06 May 2010 00:42:02 +0000

IMO he is CORRECT-He IS a citizen and BTW, as near as MY research tells me, the Bill of Rights does NOT discriminate between citizens and non-citizens. Regardless, that is a strawman-This guy IS a citizen. Now they could have DELAYED reading him his rights under the Public Safety Act” but they would have to defend that delay.

By: therightscoop

therightscoop — Wed, 05 May 2010 05:47:16 +0000

I didn't miss that point Joseph, I just didn't state it. From the standpoint of getting information and using it against him, he must be mirandized. I understand the point of trying to get info to prevent another attack and that's quite valid, as long as his rights aren't pushed aside. If it's legal and he admits it, I've got no problem.

By: Tyler

Tyler — Wed, 05 May 2010 05:43:21 +0000

That is a pretty good question. The 5th Amendment just states that you don't have to incriminate yourself, but it doesn't guarantee protection if someone DOES incriminate themselves.

By: williamm

williamm — Wed, 05 May 2010 05:15:25 +0000

They can question him under the public safety exception, but I don't know if anything he says can be used against him until he's mirandized.

By: josephaj

josephaj — Wed, 05 May 2010 04:54:24 +0000

you write "Also the Judge makes a great point that anything learned from interrogation, prior to mirandizing Shahzad, would not be admissible in court as it would be considered a violation of Shahzad’s rights."

but the purpose of not mirandizing him wouldn't be to get information admissible in court!!! the purpose is to get intelligence war intelligence that is, who are his associates specifically foreign non citizen associates...
am i missing something here?

Beck and the judge might still be right that we cannot violate his citizen rights, but to the specific point above i think you missed it...

its possible that we can interrogate him without miranda rights for that purpose and then give him his rights for which everything in a court trial would be subject to what happened after that?
im asking...

By: KeninMontana

KeninMontana — Wed, 05 May 2010 04:03:53 +0000

I really dislike the term “Homeland” , it just gives me the willys. Probably because it's a little too similar to “Motherland”(USSR) or “Fatherland” (Nazi Germany). Just saying…….

By: thomwalker

thomwalker — Wed, 05 May 2010 01:52:49 +0000

It is the “Rule of Law” that needs to be followed. He is an American citizen. Although I'd like to see him water boarded (at least) and maybe more, we need to follow the Constitution.

By: MooseOfReason

MooseOfReason — Wed, 05 May 2010 01:47:43 +0000

If he were treated any differently, that would give the government the precedence to treat any American citizen, whether a suspected terrorist or not, like some kind of “enemy combatant”, and that's dangerous.

By: williamm

williamm — Tue, 04 May 2010 21:04:25 +0000

I'm happy to see beck standing by the constitution he is always talking about. It would be great if Obama did.