KingMidget's Ramblings

Pull up a chair. Let's talk.


Others may have more examples, but I believe the two biggest mistakes the Obama Administration has made are this:  not shutting Guantanamo Bay down and … not reading Bombing Suspect #2 his Miranda Rights.  Their reliance on an exception for enemy combatants that has never really been legally challenged before speaks of something.  I don’t know what it is, but I consider it to be stupid.  This yahoo, murderous yahoo I’ll grant you, will end up being able to mount a serious challenge to any evidence produced as a result of questioning before he is read his Miranda Rights.  Why?  Well, just read the articles about what he’s disclosing now and what prompted this whole thing.  They may have been motivated by radical Islam.  They may have been inspired by Al-Qaeda.  But they did this essentially on their own.  Enemy combatants.  I don’t think so.  Major mistake.  I sure hope that some day soon we’ll find out that, in fact, he was read his Miranda Rights and very early one.


8 responses to “Mistakes

  1. Deliberately Delicious April 23, 2013 at 7:35 pm

    Wow. I haven’t been following this closely and hadn’t heard. Really? Why on earth wouldn’t they take the two minutes to do so?

    • kingmidget April 23, 2013 at 7:57 pm

      Somewhere in the post 9/11 world they got an exception for national security or enemy combatants or both. Not sure of the details at the moment. But given the vagaries of the U.S. criminal justice system I think their approach on this was mistaken. Capture a guy on the battlefield — yes, no Miranda. This is totally different.

  2. Conversations With The Moon April 23, 2013 at 10:03 pm

    Let me add the aggressive drone strike program as my second mistake. I actually think the Miranda “non-reading” will become a moot point. I have heard that in practice, Miranda isn’t as widely counted on as one would believe. Specifically in this case, after reading the PDF complaint by the FBI, they will have so much circumstantial and direct evidence that I’m pretty sure they can secure a conviction without any suspect statements. That said, I’m not sure where I fall on the whole “enemy combatant” thing…it smells to high heaven of politics and that disturbs me…but I did agree with the “imminent danger” argument for not reading Miranda (I may be butchering that last argument, but I think you catch my drift). At the end of the day, you’re the one with the JD so I may be talking out of my ass. Have a good one!

    • kingmidget April 24, 2013 at 6:31 am

      You’re right that not reading him his rights may not be a big deal because all of the evidence they have without interrogating him. You’re also right about it being an “imminent danger” exception instead of national security — I couldn’t remember the exact phrase for the exception as I wrote this last night. That all said, I just don’t understand the risk in mucking it up by failing to read him his rights. I certainly hope that by the time they got around to questioning him, two days later, they read him his rights as there didn’t appear to be any more danger. As for the enemy combatant thing — ugh. That drives me crazy how it’s being used.

  3. Sahm King April 25, 2013 at 7:25 pm

    Add to that some new evidence that seems to be coming out about the FBI being complicit in the involvement of these bombings. Not so much a “false flag”, but a possible entrapment case. Seems to be about three mistakes the FBI has made, and on top of that, the knowledge that the Department of Homeland Security had of the boys’ whereabouts, as well as Russia’s knowledge of their whereabouts and lack of AQ involvement.

    • kingmidget April 25, 2013 at 7:58 pm

      I’m not sure what evidence you’re referring to, but based on your comment I went to google. Here’s one thing I found … … there are so many holes in this it’s ridiculous. Bomb sniffing dogs at the start and finish line are evidence of FBI complicity??? Law enforcement on roofs evidence of complicity??? Come on. As for entrapment … I’m struggling to see that after the videos and witness testimony that has led us to where we are. I’m certainly willing to consider the possibility that the FBI screwed up when Russia asked them to look into the older brother (although I’m not sold on that yet given Russia’s relationship with Chechens), but complicity. Nah.

      • Sahm King April 25, 2013 at 8:20 pm

        Perhaps “complicit” was the wrong choice of words? What I mean is, a sting operation gone wrong. At least that seems to be the suggestion, that the FBI did know in advance, and that one of their tactics appears to be setting up these operations wherein they procure materials and hand them over to would-be terrorists in an effort to put said terrorists in a position to commit the crime so that there is no defense. So that they, essentially, catch them in the act. It’s not an unknown tactic. This seems to be a case where usage of the tactic went wrong, where the subject got away.

      • kingmidget April 25, 2013 at 8:24 pm

        Let’s wait and see. That sounds much more plausible than where the internet took me after seeing your original comment. I certainly hope it’s not true.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: