Originally Posted by Nutek (Post 10679711)

Originally Posted by Ichigo-chan (Post 10679718)

Is this a Masonic greeting? I want to be a member too!

Originally Posted by Ichigo-chan (Post 10679718)

Is this a Masonic greeting? I want to be a member too!

Originally Posted by Sally Redux (Post 10679724)

42.

Originally Posted by SultanOfSwing (Post 10679720)

No.

You're already a member, of whatever the hell this is, by virtue of replying.

Originally Posted by Pulaski (Post 10678824)

I guess the question we are all tiptoeing around is "Why does islam inspire a small but significant number of its followers to seek to destroy what they do not agree with, even if it means their own death?"

It is a phenomena that goes back more than a thousand years, to the original assassins, who lived in the area of modern Syria, and who would stalk their victims on the victim's home turf and kill them in a frenzied knife attack even though it tended to lead to their own death. Aside from a few self-imolating Buddhists, I can think of no other religion that has (some) clerics that preach destruction and encourage suicide among their followers.

Originally Posted by Ichigo-chan (Post 10679568)

I only just read know about him being Mirandaized- this should have happened earlier

Originally Posted by dakota44 (Post 10679906)

The "Public safety exception" to Miranda rights. Look it up. In cases of terrorism, I agree with it. They have the opportunity to ask questions to try and determine if there are any immediate further threats, without being handcuffed by Miranda. ....... I have no problem with the Public safety exception, which has been ruled constitutional by the Scotus.

Originally Posted by Pulaski (Post 10679911)

It'll be interesting to see if the 16 hours of pre-Miranda questioning that took place in this case are acceptable.

Originally Posted by Pulaski (Post 10679911)

It'll be interesting to see if the 16 hours of pre-Miranda questioning that took place in this case are acceptable.

Originally Posted by sir_eccles (Post 10679949)

For all we know he was going to say what he wanted to say in those 16 hours whether he was Mirandized or not. His confession is likely only a very small part of the case against him.

Reminder, the 5th amendment applies whether you have been reminded it exists or not. Not that criminals (and alleged criminals) generally think rationally as that tends to be the reason they end up criminals, but if he had wanted to say nothing he could have.

Originally Posted by sir_eccles (Post 10679949)

For all we know he was going to say what he wanted to say in those 16 hours whether he was Mirandized or not. His confession is likely only a very small part of the case against him.

Reminder, the 5th amendment applies whether you have been reminded it exists or not. Not that criminals (and alleged criminals) generally think rationally as that tends to be the reason they end up criminals, but if he had wanted to say nothing he could have.

Originally Posted by paddingtongreen (Post 10679968)

You think? They would probably have mentioned Guantanamo and waterboarding if he hadn't spoken freely.

Originally Posted by paddingtongreen (Post 10679968)

You think? They would probably have mentioned Guantanamo and waterboarding if he hadn't spoken freely.
The exception is only to discover if there are any immediate threats, say timed WMD elsewhere or not.

Originally Posted by Pulaski (Post 10679971)

Oh, I agree entirely with you, but I still think that his lawyers will, at some point, try to argue that 16 hours of pre-Miranda questioning was excessive. As you say though, any confession or self incriminating statements he makes are likely wholly unnecessary for the prosecution's case.