fbpx

The Next Recession Will Be The Last!

The Deep State Is Preparing Their CHECKMATE Move
You Must Be Ready To Go On The Attack!
DOWNLOAD THE ULTIMATE RESET GUIDE NOW!

Police State Interrogations: Obama Rolls Back Miranda Rights

Mac Slavo
June 1st, 2011
SHTFplan.com
Comments (43) Read by 1,406 people

THC-free CBD Formula - Zero High Brand

It’s really nothing new to this administration or the last to flush the US Constitution down the toilet. Terrorism, it seems, is reason enough. In the latest attack on individual freedoms and Constitutional protections we see further chipping away of the 5th amendment as the Obama administration adopts a new policy which essentially waives Miranda rights if interrogators believe the information is related to terrorism and must be acquired in a timely fashion:

A Federal Bureau of Investigation memorandum reviewed by The Wall Street Journal says the policy applies to “exceptional cases” where investigators “conclude that continued unwarned interrogation is necessary to collect valuable and timely intelligence not related to any immediate threat.” Such action would need prior approval from FBI supervisors and Justice Department lawyers, according to the memo, which was issued in December but not made public.

Matthew Miller, a Justice Department spokesman, said the memo ensures that “law enforcement has the ability to question suspected terrorists without immediately providing Miranda warnings when the interrogation is reasonably prompted by immediate concern for the safety of the public or the agents.” He said “the threat posed by terrorist organizations and the nature of their attacks—which can include multiple accomplices and interconnected plots—creates fundamentally different public safety concerns than traditional criminal cases.”

Source: WSJ

The obvious dangers are, of course, that this new ‘policy’ will be turned against the American people on a wholesale basis. It’s important to note, however, that this new policy is just that, a policy – it is not legislation – and the Miranda protections have not been eliminated. This new policy is to be used only in exceptional cases related to terror suspects, and information acquired in instances where the Miranda warning was not given to suspects remains inadmissible in court.

The problem is, that over the last 10 years the definition of what is or is not a terrorist has evolved. In 2002, a terrorist was a foreigner who attacked US interest at home or abroad. Today, by all accounts, the meaning of ‘terrorist’ has broadened significantly, with various levels of terrorist activities. If you’re a survivalist type, fly a Gadsden flag, or engage in your First Amendment right of free speech through protest,  for example, you could very well be considered a low-level terror suspect.

It may be hard to believe but it’s true. The infamous leaked MIAC report highlights exactly these types of individuals as being potential threats, a.k.a. domestic terrorists.

This is where the real issues with the rolling back of Miranda warnings arises. While inadmissible in court for traditional crimes, under the Patriot Act evidence doesn’t matter. The very fact that one’s Miranda warnings are waived suggests in and of itself that you are deemed a threat to public safety under terrorism definitions. This means that it is not only possible, but likely, as has been the case with terror suspects in the past, that those who have their Miranda rights waived by investigators can be held indefinitely without trial – or evidence – under U.S. anti-terrorism laws.

In essence, any activity deemed to be a threat to the public welfare could be deemed an “exceptional case” under this new policy, potentially leading to charges being filed not under criminal law, but terror law. It’s an easy way out for those law enforcement / anti-terror agencies that would question a suspect without the benefit of advising them of their Miranda rights. If a mistake is made by law enforcement and prosecutors, no problem, because they can detain, try, judge and punish in secret courts, where Constitutional protections don’t exist.

The hypocrisy in this new Miranda Rights roll back is shocking, especially when you consider that a week after this policy shift announcement the Obama administration was generating buzz regarding Federal crack downs on civil rights abuses by big city police forces:

In a marked shift from the Bush administration, President Obama’s Justice Department is aggressively investigating several big urban police departments for systematic civil rights abuses such as harassment of racial minorities, false arrests, and excessive use of force.

In interviews, activists and attorneys on the ground in several cities where the DOJ has dispatched civil rights investigators welcomed the shift. To progressives disappointed by Eric Holder’s Justice Department on key issues like the failure to investigate Bush-era torture and the prosecution of whistle-blowers, recent actions by the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division are a bright spot.

In just the past few months, the Civil Rights Division has announced “pattern and practice” investigations in Newark, New Jersey and Seattle. It’s also conducting a preliminary investigation of the Denver Police Department, and all this is on top of a high-profile push to reform the notorious New Orleans Police Department — as well as criminal prosecutions of several New Orleans officers.

While it’s clear that law enforcement agencies have been progressively overstepping their bounds on various civil rights issues, it is ironic that the Obama administration would aggressively pursue civil rights violations on a local and State level considering that not a week earlier that very same administration directly attacked one of the most basic American freedoms: The right to remain silent.

It’s a bizarro world, indeed.

Click here to subscribe: Join over one million monthly readers and receive breaking news, strategies, ideas and commentary.
CBD Oils, Isolates, Supplements And Information
Please Spread The Word And Share This Post

Author: Mac Slavo
Views: Read by 1,406 people
Date: June 1st, 2011
Website: www.SHTFplan.com

Copyright Information: Copyright SHTFplan and Mac Slavo. This content may be freely reproduced in full or in part in digital form with full attribution to the author and a link to www.shtfplan.com. Please contact us for permission to reproduce this content in other media formats.

43 Comments...

Vote: Click here to vote for SHTF Plan as a Top Prepper Web Site
    • chase says:

      you have the right to remain silent, i demand you use that right any time you get that funny feeling, and when they say we are here to help, learn your rights, exercise them to fullest, just my opinion, you can never trust any one who thinks your guilty.

  1. VRF says:

    does it really matter? (tic)
    what does the M-rights say

    that anything you say can and WILL be used AGAINST you…no where do they say could or may be used FOR you in your defense..nope..right away even back than they were out to rail road you..

    anytime to encounter one of the NWO officers..you know the ones that flash a badge or wear one…just STFU..if you have the ability..
    dont say shit, and even when they play the good cop bad cop shit, dont fall for it..none of those officers are “here to help” you

    Trust me

  2. VRF says:

    Oh and every one of our rights is on the block..keep watching, its going to become very interesting in the last days weeks and months before the admins. joke of a vote

    • VRF,

      They can say what they want and they can legislate what they want and re-interpret what they want. I follow THE LAW and the force of law is only (and always has been) enforced by deadly force.

      One thing everyone must realize is that they aren’t doing anything wrong. The laws and the policies they pass mean nothing. They are not the government. They are a corporation posing as our government. What they do and what they say is not governed by The Constitution, the supreme law of the land. Their power is limitless until they violate your rights. …and your rights are never violated unless you actually know them.

      A corporation is, essentially, a “person” just as you and I (since we are also “persons”). In that capacity they can make any policy or “law” they want. (they can call a cup of coffee a “law” if they want. Thats what they do: redefine language to throw you off, but thats another story.)

      This United States Federal Corporation can only affect other corporations. …and you are one of those “persons” if you claim to be. Look it up. Corporations cannot rule over men and women, only over “persons”. Look up the legal definitions. Whenever you declare yourself a “person” you are declaring that you are the JOHN Q. PUBLIC entity and you are under their authority. But, if you tell them you are john q. public, a living, breathing man on the land, watch how fast they back down. Try it on a minor traffic offense. Go find a cop, run a stop sign or speed and try it. Study a little first. I’ve been told you’ll find there are no penalties for a man or a woman but for a “person” there is a fine and a ticket. When they ask you to sign the ticket, sign in, all lower case, john q. public, no contract implied. The officer will go ballistic, demand you sign it the normal way. Refuse. They’ll take you to jail for 24 hours. Demand to see the judge. Ask what you are being charged with. They’ll let you go. I’m told it works every time. After the 3rd of 4th time, they’ll just grunt and let you go.

      As a man, living and breathing, on the land, they can’t lawfully even take you into custody unless you’ve hurt another man or stolen property. But, since the general population doesn’t know this, they run amock arresting, detaining, kidnapping. If you know your rights and inform them, they’ll back off. But, if you unknowingly pretend you’re a person, well, then you put yourself under their authority.

      I am not a lawyer and I do not practice law and I do not give legal advice or recommendations, so, if you thought this man was giving you “legal advice” you are wrong. Regardless of whether you believe what I say, do believe this: DO NOT TALK TO THE POLICE, EVER. They will treat you as a person and not a man or woman and you will get hurt, fined and/or imprisoned.

  3. That Guy says:

    “”but….. but…. the officer said if I told him everything he wanted me to say, then he would make sure it would all be OK””…. sad last words of the innocent man.

    The best advice for anyone, anywhere, is DO NOT TALK TO THE POLICE, EVER. No good can come from it, and you may wind up in prison because some part of “your confesssion” convicts you of a crime which you may have had nothing to do with.

    What do rich people do when there is trouble?

    Recall the case of Tiger Woods / wife with golf club / / car window smashed / car crash …. remember?? He said NOTHING to the police, not a word, and they demanded an interview, but they got nothing. And he, and his wife, were not charged, accused or found to have broken any laws. I

    will not get into the specifics of what laws they may have broken, because it is meaningless at this point, I am only pointing out the fact that TIGER DID NOT TALK TO THE POLICE, and they really really wanted to “interview” him.

    btw- please reaffirm anything I am say (or anything anyone else says) on your own, through your own searches and information seeking.

    If you are ever taken into any type of custody, ask if you are being charged with a crime, then ask if you are free to go… and if you are free to go… THEN GO.

    There are some great youtube videos and other info “out there” about the best exact POLITE words to use with the police in most situations (at home, in car and elsewhere), learn them, use them.

    If the Police have the proper information, they will use it to arrest you and convict you. There is no reason for you to help them out.

    First… DONT BREAK THE LAW, DONT BE A SCUMBAG…
    BE A GOOD HUMAN… BE INNOCENT… then… if questioned by LEO…. Dont be rude. Dont be a smart ass. Be polite and decline any to make ANY comments.
    Lastly… go sleep at home.

  4. scott says:

    Ass up for no man! Take some krav maga and at least go out with a couple ears and eyes or balls in your hand.

  5. Charlie says:

    Seems like the only people who don’t have to obey the laws are law enforcement,…and the wealthy,…,and politicians,…am I leaving anyone out?

  6. cyber_samurai says:

    Scott,
    don’t forget! The cops are often taught krav maga, too! In fact, evidence suggests that they learn a version specially tailored to their gestapo tactics…. A version you don’t see on videos at your favorite martial arts sites.

  7. Policy vs Law
    People have been going to jail for violation of departmental policies that the legal system has no knowledge of. It is the new way of making “laws” and getting around the legislative system. There are thousands of these policy/laws that have put people in jail. And the judge has no ability to determine a lighter sentence or use his discretion depending on the circumstances. The policy, unlike the law, is very cut and dried.
    So which is more threatening a law that removes rights but gives judges that ability to look at each individual case or the policy and just puts you in jail for the maximum time no matter what the circumstances?
    And remember ignorance of the law (and now that includes departmental policy) is not an excuse.

  8. Gods Creation says:

    VRF hit the nail on the head.

    If you rely on the cops to tell you your rights, you don’t have any anyway. That’s all Miranda was about. Informing their victim that any communication is voluntary.

    Everyone should have a prewritten statement to show these people that provides the basic information you want to give them and NOTICE them of your choice to remain silent and NOT contract with them. A Notarized documentation of intent must be acknowledged and honored by the courts.

    Say nothing. Do nothing. Sign nothing. The only exception is asking if you are free to go.

  9. What about bathroom? Can you ask to go pee?

    Sorry I couldn’t resist.

    And as “That Guy” said…there are in fact many good videos on this subject on youtube

  10. MIVidaLoca says:

    Guys, just because they don’t have to give you your Miranda warning in certain situations does NOT mean you lose the right to remain silent nor do you lose the right to representation by a lawyer. The reason for the Miranda warning is to let people know that they HAVE the right to be silent and can exercise that right if they so choose.

    Generally, if the law enforcement officer does not give a suspect in custody the Miranda warning then anything the suspect said would be deemed “fruit from the poisonous tree” and would not be admissible in court against the suspect. With the warning, if the suspect chooses to speak, anything he or she says is fair game.

    Don’t get me wrong, I am wholeheartedly against any erosion of our rights, but just wanted to spread the word that you can still remain silent and ask for representation, even if they don’t tell you that.

    • Jonny V says:

      No one should talk to the police at all, even witnesses to whatever crime. Talking to cops is a good way to end up being raided and your dogs shot at 3 in the morning for no reason at all. The videos are all over youtube. No one should ever trust a cop.

  11. overtheedge says:

    Who doesn’t know their Miranda Rights?

    Answer: The same oxygen thieves that don’t know the IVth-VIth Amendments. That is where Miranda Rights were derived from. Or maybe they don’t watch any of the cops shows on TV, but can tell you everything about Lindsay Lohan or Survivor.

    The “oxygen thief” comment comes from the same direction as those who believe they possess the rights of entitlements not written into the Constitution.

    The IXth Amendment does NOT guarantee unlimitted rights.

    If you’re not willing to do the time, don’t do the crime. No, this is not an over-simplification. If you don’t know right from wrong, you are a danger to your family, neighbors and society as a whole.

    Do you want LEOs to always ignore what appears to be a crime just because they lack enough proof to get a warrant and time to intervene is critical to prevent further injury? This is NOT about LEOs failing to exercise common sense in the initial investigation. There must be sufficient indication that a crime is taking place. Otherwise, the LEOs need to walk away. Most arguments are just that and no more.

    OpSec needs to be exercised at all times even when you are a peaceful law-abiding citizen. Don’t openly display anything you don’t want the general public to know even if it is perfectly legal.

    But stay tuned. There are some who believe that desperate times call for desperate measures and then all bets are off. And thusly we have investigations into LEO abuses.

    • MIVidaLoca says:

      I disagree. The whole point of having the Bill of Rights is to protect our freedoms as human beings. Your statement “don’t openly display anything you don’t want the general public to know even if it perfectly legal” opens the door for a polioe state where even IF you are law abiding, you still are subject to limitations on your freedoms. And the erosion of our freedoms is what I and other Americans see occurring. Where does it stop?

      The problem is that the recent court decisions are more and more in favor of police action without a warrant, the legal cornerstone of the 4th and 5th amendment. Protections are already in place to address the exigent circumstances issue, which you allude to in your discussion. The cost and price of having a free society allows that some criminals will go free in order to secure the freedoms of the innocent, law abiding citizens.

  12. weren’t cops originally only supposed to catch the criminal? When did they evolve to stopping crime?

    I’d rather a criminal go free any day vs a innocent man getting locked up or someones rights getting stomped on.

    But then again, I am one of those crazy people who doesn’t fall for the dangerous, very dangerous line of “don’t do anything wrong and you won’t have any problems” Yeah I figured that one out along with the truth about the Easter bunny, the tooth fairy and Santa Claus

  13. Jonny V says:

    Your best bet is to have no contact with law enforcement at all. Exclude them from your social life entirely, even at the gun club, or casual contact on the street. When you see a cop, head the other way. If one pulls in behind you, immediately pull off the road and keep turning until they give up. Refuse to acknowledge their existence, and if they chase you down and force it, just say that you don’t talk to the cops, ever. Just repeat over and over “Don’t tase me bro!”, “Don’t tase me bro!”. Make sure someone secretly videotapes the entire thing.

    Being a law-abiding citizen doesn’t have a damn thing to do with it. The cops cannot be trusted, ever.

  14. Anonymous says:

    That’s the reason I carry because a cop is too heavy to carry around.

  15. SmokinOkie says:

    You can get a shoulder holster for those really short midget cops, but they still show under your suit jacket.

  16. SmokinOkie says:

    Rats. Somebody tased me and woke me up!
    There’s just too much crap going on in the world. I’m going back to my original motto:
    ‘Reality is for people who can’t face alcohol’

  17. Durango Kidd says:

    Here in the 9th District the courts have affirmed that the only information that a citizen must give an officer under the 4th Amendment is his or her correct, full, legal name.

    No other information is required.

    • Jonny V says:

      Amen brother!

    • Zel says:

      And by giving your full legal name you’ve placed yourself under their authority – give them a nickname, tell them that’s what you go by, go to jail for a couple of days, say nothing, sign nothing because they’ll make endless attempts during that time to make you enter into a contractual relationship with them. After a day or two they’ll kick you loose if you’ve harmed no one.

      Your legal name by the way, is hearsay, isn’t it? You did not have the brain power to understand the process when you were named – people have always told you who you are, referred to you by your corporate designation. So when your name is called in court, don’t stand up when it’s called, just say you’re the only living man there who could shed light on the issue the court is considering, and ask to see the person who says that is actually your name. If they have no such living person in the courtroom, and they won’t, they’ll dismiss the case to keep people from understanding why it was dismissed.

      • MIVidaLoca says:

        Zel, hearsay is a construction of evidentiary law that applies only in the courtroom, during a trial, for the admission of evidence.

        Under your argument, since you are the only one that is competent to testify as to who you are, you are an indispensible witness. As such, you can be ordered by the court to verify your name. If you fail to comply with the court’s request, they will simply find you in contempt and either fine or imprison you (or both) until you do comply. They have the power to hold you indefintely.

        Further, since you have benefitted and used that particular name for the duration of your current life, you are deemed to have accepted it as your name and cannot later deny that it is your name.

        I would advise people to never employ this strategy as it will wholly backfire and not achieve the desired result.

        • Zel says:

          I bow to your reasoned response, MiVidaLoca.
          I could argue that I have not benefited from using my name, but can see how such arguments could be made. I avoid contracting with corporate entities, both private and governmental as much as possible and I would prefer to reduce such contacts even further and be left alone. Thanks for correcting my flawed suggestion.

  18. Dave says:

    Like all incremental changes to government policy, they start benign and harmless, then proceed to grow like weeds until it’s commonplace for anyone to be interogated for anything at all.

  19. Blasko says:

    So should we wait for them in the bushes after they let you leave. At some point we will all be forced to deal with the cops in a very violent way. I for one will not lose my life to some low life cop. Are you ready to defend yourself. I know I am.

  20. A few weeks ago, was it here, on this site, the video was played where the attorney held seminars telling everybody— innocent, witness, observer, whatever—DO NOT TALK TO POLICE…THEY TURN EVERYTHING YOU SAY AROUND AND DO NOT TALK TO POLICE— E-V-E-R!!!

  21. oooHHH..oooHH..ooHH…don’t forget about the judge sentenced for accepting kick backs for sending juveniles to juvenile homes….ugh!!!
    That is corrupt right up there with false imprisonment..huh??

  22. Joseph Whitney says:

    Enough is enough!It is time to stop the insanity. We need to reestablish the principles that the founding of this nation was based on. Not one true statsman left in the bunch!

  23. Doug says:

    Obviously, many of you are too young to remember that the “Miranda rights” warning was the product of the ultra-liberal Earl Warren Supreme Court. It was “read into” the Constitution and has only served to “dignify” the criminal. And just look what that has brought us to as a society.

    And as for you people who say, “Never talk to the police”, get you heads out of the sand – or wherever they are. Unless you are a criminal, the police are asking questions for YOUR and YOUR COMMUNITY’S benefit.

    • chuckles says:

      aka “I have a dream…”

    • Gods Creation says:

      Doug, are saying that the cops having to read their victims some rights is what has caused the problems we have?

      As for what the cops really do and whether or not one should talk to them, lets look at how they act. You are treated as an enemy and a criminal by the average cop on the street. They lie and claim authorities above the law. They are there to generate revenue for the corp, not protect you.

      You must put them in the right category and treat them accordingly. Their power is corporate, not constitutional, so they should be treated as any other part of the corporation. They must be avoided at all cost, and never spoken to.

      You can say I have my head in the sand, but it smells better than where yours apparently is.

    • MIVidaLoca says:

      Doug, the reading of the Miranda rights keeps the bad cops honest and ensures that the good ones keep their reputation.

  24. Plain Old American says:

    Sorry Doug,
    I have known too many cops and some are just criminals on the other side of the law. The advice: “Do not talk” is truly great advice. Ask any lawyer or man that has been married.

  25. Ben Dover says:

    VRF is exactly right–silence is golden. POA is also right. I know someone who was in a county jail who was told by a jailer “There are better people on your side of the bars than what I have to work with”.

  26. Durango Kidd says:

    Recently in Tucson, SWAT raided an ex-Marine Iraqi war veteran’s home in association with drug cartel activity. He had several AR’s but never had time to fire a shot. They fired 77 shots from virtually point blank range and hit him 61 times.

    Do ya think that was over kill?

  27. mmkerey says:

    Ummm You have the RIGHT to go Fookyourself Mister PoliceMan I want my Lawyer!

    Thats all ya gotta say and shut your mouth!

  28. DC Discounter says:

    What is this bull****!? Only the *owner* of a right can waive that right, the State cannot waive it on your behalf! It’s not called your Miranda Privileges, something subject to withdrawal for bad behavior!! This to totally FUBAR.