Shouldn’t it be the default and not require the suspect/subject to actually ask for one? Has there ever been any attempt to make that the norm in any countries? I think the only question should be “do you have your own lawyer you like to use, or are you happy enough with the court-appointed one?”

I’m not even sure opting out should be allowed, but I’m open to hearing reasons why that would be a bad system, or indeed a worse system than the one most countries seem to have now. So many miscarriages of justice could have been easily avoided.

    • JeremyHuntQW12@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      The 5th amendment only applies before arrest and during court. You still have the right to silence after arrest, that is a common law right.

      Salinas volunteered to go to the police station (he wasn’t arrested), so he had no common law right to silence.

      • fodor@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Of course what you wrote is not what it actually says in the Bill of Rights.

      • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        That’s close to what Scalia/Thomas argued but that’s not what the majority opinion says. They explicitly say you always have the ability to plead the fifth and have it not be used as evidence. And it’s true. You never have to self incriminate. But their argument is you have to make it explicit, which is frankly dumb.

    • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      64
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      The fact that in some instances the legal system does work according to the invocation of a magic phrase makes it so much harder to deal with the delusions of sovcits. The right to remain silent should be just that. You don’t have to say “I’m invoking my right to free speech” every time before opening your mouth for it to count.

      • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        That’s the trick. An example is the am I being detained thing. A clock of reasonableness starts ticking as soon as you’re detained until the detention is considered a potentially unlawful arrest, but that detention doesn’t start until the officer tells you you can’t leave. Also a cop has to have a valid reason to detain you or anything you say will be inadmissible in court. Until you ask that magic phrase, though, you’re having a consensual encounter and everything you say(or not say) will always be admissible.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      2 days ago

      The Erosion of Miranda

      In Vega v. Tekoh, the U.S. Supreme Court held, in part, that the jury could not be required to find Tekoh’s Fifth Amendment rights were violated because Miranda warnings are not rights but rather judicially crafted rules, which opens the door for overruling Miranda altogether.

      The Vega decision will have a stronger impact on young defendants, the intellectually disabled, racial minorities, immigrants, and anyone unfamiliar with the criminal justice system and more prone to coercion.

      And this was in 2014.

      Imagine being Mahmoud Khalil right now and talking about the Fifth Amendment. You’re lucky if you can invoke the Suspension Clause.

      • psud@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        15 hours ago

        I don’t think you want to be named Md. in America at the moment or in the last several years