U.S. Supreme Court protects police from 'Miranda' lawsuits

[ItsjustMe]

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-protects-police-miranda-lawsuits-2022-06-23/

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday shielded police from the risk of paying money damages for failing to advise criminal suspects of their rights before obtaining statements later used against them in court, siding with a Los Angeles County deputy sheriff.

The justices ruled 6-3 in favor of deputy sheriff Carlos Vega, who had appealed a lower court decision reviving a lawsuit by a hospital employee named Terence Tekoh who accused the officer of violating his rights under the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination.

Tekoh was charged with sexually assaulting a hospital patient after Vega obtained a written confession from him without first informing the suspect of his rights through so-called Miranda warnings. Tekoh was acquitted at trial.

The court's six conservatives were in the majority in the ruling written by Justice Samuel Alito, with its three liberal members dissenting.

[sop]

1. "Never talk to the police" is good advice.

[RKP5637]

2. K&R!!!!! And cops can not be trusted! n/t

[rsdsharp]

3. That's basically what Justice Robert Jackson wrote.

“[A]ny lawyer worth his salt will tell the suspect in no uncertain terms to make no statement to police under any circumstances." Watts v. Indiana (1949)(Jackson, J., concurring/dissenting)

[LonePirate]

4. No fear of lawsuits translates into no Miranda warnings whatsoever.

[TreasonousBastard]

5. Even PDs don't bother fighting Miranda suits any more. So...

what's the point of bringing it up?

Is Reconstruction on the table?

[malthaussen]

6. Step by step. They have already attacked Miranda once.

This session, as anticipated, has been a horror show of terrible rulings. The only right they want you to have is the right to obey.

-- Mal

[BrightKnight]

7. Because bad caps are not protected enough?

It doesn’t sound like that supports law or order.