“You have the right — in your anxious and confused state — to try to figure out what rights you may or may not have by deciphering the ambiguous statement I am currently reading in a robot-like voice — as if my true intentions are not to inform you of anything, but rather to show my disdain for civil liberties and humanity in general.”
Alright, it’s not that bad, usually. There will surely be a line or two about the lawyer and the silence to which anyone arrested in the U.S. is entitled. But the Miranda statement, as it’s known, is not delivered the same way everywhere.
The Florida Supreme Court recently ruled that Tampa police did not adequately explain to Kevin Dwayne Powell that he was allowed to have a lawyer with him during any and all questioning. Powell confessed to illegal firearm possession, but the court overturned his conviction.
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard the case and appears to be taking the same stance — one that would set a precedent.
“You have the right to talk to a lawyer before answering any of our questions,” the Tampa police informed Powell. His lawyers argue that “before” is different from “before and during.”
A technicality! “Letting this confessed criminal off is a travesty,” you might be thinking.
But the courts are taking this position to ensure the rights we extend to accused criminals — rights that make our country great — are clearly and fully understood. It would be hypocritical to claim we have a fair justice system without these.
Tampa police (and all police around the country) need to remember this before they deprive any other Americans from rights they deserve.
And before they allow any more criminals to go free on “technicalities.”
