Ferguson City: It Took DOJ to Mandate Transparency, Accountability....
Ferguson City: It Took DOJ to Mandate Transparency, Accountability....
Popular posts from this blog
I Never Knew I Had Them....Take 2 and Reflect.....
I Never Knew I Had Them...Take 2 and Reflect
Implicit Biases......
To me, it seems like because they used the exception to the miranda rule in questioning him on the way to the hospital that they are legally allowed to deny him his rights to an attorney. I don't understand how the prosecuter can not allow his public defender access to him at this crucial time. Regardless of if he is guily of the bombings he still has the same rights as anybody else in the same situation to have thier rights protected. Kinda sounds like to me that the reason they aren't allowing the public defender to see him at this time is because they want to be the first to question him when he is awake and able to answer all of their questions. But then again shouldn't his lawyer be present when that happens? Ciaccio002
ReplyDeleteI agree Ciaccio002, he deserves all the rights anyone else would have. He is only being accused right now so we do not outright know whether or not he actually did it. It is all a little unfair, but if he really did do it then I believe that he doesn't deserve any of these rights. zmw002
DeleteI agree all the rights anyone else would get and yes it is unfair to him no matter its not exactly hurting him but it is unfair. If and when he goes to court he could use this as an argument that he was withheld the right to his lawyer and that could play a major role in the case or it could do nothing in his favor. He wants to talk to an attorney he has tried and the lawyers have tried and sent letters to judges and nothing happens nothing at all that is unfair to anyone to have this happen. JE002
DeleteBasically, they are not allowing this man's lawyer in to see him and not giving him his Miranda Rights so that they can extract a confession from him as easily as possible with little resistance. I do believe this is a little unfair, but if he really was the man that committed the bombings then he probably did not deserve a lawyer in the first place. However, there is no outright proof that he did it, so I feel like he deserves to be treated just like any other suspect and get a lawyer to represent him. Also, since there is no evidence that he did it, I also believe he should receive his Miranda Rights, so that everything is done properly and none of the officials in charge of the situation get into hot water. zmw002
ReplyDeleteZMW002, I completely agree. No matter how much contempt I have for this man, he has rights. In such troubled times like these, we need to stick to our moral code and code of law, and give this man a lawyer. It is our job as Americans to show the world that no matter who you are, you will be shown fairness in our country.-OKC002
DeleteThese are really the things that make you go hmm. What good are our rights if they are being with held in a situation like this? Is this telling everyone that only certain people have those rights in the eyes of the law? I think there is a tad bit of bias going on here. Ciaccio002
DeleteI agree. Honestly reading this article made me a little mad and disappointed in the fact that they supposable see no fairness for this man. Yes this all could have been a form or terrorism which is not okay, but how would they get his side of the sorry without providing him any type of help or a lawyer. I see it as everyone should have the same rights, no matter what the situation is, Kt002
DeleteI agree with you zmw002. Even though this man tried to kill many people with his bombs, he still deserves all the rights everyone else gets. Everything should be done properly, that way none of the officials in charge of the situation get into hot water like you said. Steve002
DeleteIt seems like they have legally denied his rights to an attorney. He still deserves all the rights any other person would get no matter of his race,sex or whatever else he is still human and gets the same rights any American would have. Honestly though I don't think they are doing anything wrong at the moment they are not questioning him he is basically "detained" right now even though he is under arrest. My personal feeling though I think he should be able to see an attorney I don't see any harm in it and I don't really know the reason on why they are denying that from him right now. Unless if they really screwed up in the case and or investigation I have no clue on what they are trying to hide or what they could even hide. From what they tell you on what the police did it doesn't seem illegal now there is always more that happened then what you are told but I just don't see why they would even be acting this way in denying his lawyer. JE002
ReplyDeleteFor the most part, I fully agree. Any person derserves their rights. However, I really feel like enemies of the state should maybe not be given full rights. Do you believe that a terrorist has the full right to speak to a lawyer and attorney, giving him even a slim chance of getting away with mass murder? - AJC002
DeleteI agree with you good or bad they should be able to have the same rights as everyone else. It is not right for them to not give him that. Adelle002
DeleteSo this is definitely a case in which a bias of mine would get in the way. I personally could care less if a terrorist was read his rights, or even given his rights for that matter. We’re at war, and any form of terrorist, even a homegrown one, is an enemy combatant at this point. This man shot several police officers, and harmed his fellow Americans, and it is for this reason that I could care less about this man getting a lawyer. This can’t be the case however. We are the leaders of the free world, and this is not a good example to set. If we deny one man his rights, in a society where people are innocent until proven guilty, then we are just as bad as any other country. This man, since he was obviously placed under arrest, he needed to be read his rights. He deserves to have a lawyer, no matter how easy it will make it for the prosecution, and no matter how bad we think he deserves to rot in a cell for what he did. As the symbol for fairness across the world, we need to stick to our laws and principals, and give this man a lawyer.-OKC002
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with you OKC002. I would not be able to deal with the terrorist because I would lose it. I wouldn't care either if he was read his rights or not. He shot people. Not just people Americans. As soon as you cross that line is some way, shape, or form you know what you have done and I wouldn't have gotten him a lawyer. However, I agree that that is not how things work and regardless they do need to get him a lawyer to keep things fair.-Rocker002
DeleteI tend to agree with you as well, OKC002. It would be very difficult for me to care about a single right that this man has after what he did on our soil. It doesn't seem fair that he should receive any rights after doing such harm to people in this country. We do have to follow procedure and do what is right though.
Deletegh_blackhawks002
I agree with what you have to say OKC002. He committed actions that we should not have to put up with this is so wrong on many levels. But, we should still have to read hi his rights and allow him to speak to a lawyer. Everyone deserves to be treated equal no matter how bad the actions they committed were. AW002
DeleteYes this man does need some sort of legal representation. I don't believe it should be the biggest and the best but he does need somebody to defend him. I believe the police used a bit of a loophole in terms of the Miranda rights. They probably should have read them to the man so that way they could cover their own asses and not have to worry about it coming back and biting them. Now I don't believe what this man did was right. If it were up to me I wouldn't have read him his rights either. I would stall as long as possible to get this man legal representation. But I know that's not how things work and I know that for Miranda to be affective and right they need to be sure to do it in every case no matter how challenging it may be.-Rocker002
ReplyDeleteWhen any person is accused of a crime, be them guilty or innocent, they have rights equal to one another. In general I feel that way. But honestly, if somebody is suspected of terrorism, then take all precautions necessary. In my opinion, when you become an enemy of the people in such ways as to cause large masses of innocents to die, you really should lose your rights. If a terrorist comes through a small town and kills 50 people, I don't care if he sees his lawyer or not. Assuming officers use it correctly, reasonable suspicion of terrorism should allow for certain rights to be surrendered. However, I understand that it is very likely that officers would not always use this situation justly, so giving everyone their rights is generally a good idea. Even with their rights to an attorney, that terrorist is probably still going to prison.
ReplyDelete- AJC002
Even thought Ahamad Khan Rahami was accused and will probably be responsible for carrying bombs and putting others in danger, after reading this situation I kind of feel bad for him, only because all of this was unfair. I could see this as a form of terrorism and yes it is extremely dangerous to have a man like this walking the streets of out country, not having a clue what he could be up to so yes he should be in custody after he's released from the hospital but its the fact that they didn't give him a fair chance in providing a lawyer for him or treating his rights fairly. What if it was a big misunderstanding, which i know its not, but if anything he should be able to defend himself in whatever he has to say about his actions. Its crazy to me how investigators got to question him in the ambulance but would not give him a lawyer and the fact that he was questioned under expiation to the Miranda rules. Kt002
ReplyDeleteI would have to disagree with you on this. I feel that if someone does something like this and tries to kill several hundred people at once, then they should not have any rights to a fair trial. I get where you are coming from with this, but I just feel he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, whether it is fair or unfair. CAE002
DeleteAfter reading this article about Ahmad Khan Rahami, who was accused of carrying out bombings in Manhattan, I was surprised to discover that his rights were pretty much non-existent. This to me does not seem like a major issue just because of the magnitude of what he was trying to accomplish: kill as many Americans as he could. By definition he is to be considered a terrorist to the people of the United States. I do not necessarily agree with him basically not having his rights just because it is likely that he will not get a fair trial. So given that, I can definitely see where some people would be outraged by this, but again, considering what he did I would not care if he had his rights taken from him or if he got an unfair trial. Honestly, if someone wants to pull something like that, then they do not deserve to have their rights to a fair trial. CAE002
ReplyDeleteEven though Ahmad Rahamd could and is classified as a domestic terrorist I still don’t feel it necessary for him to have his basic rights taking away from him. It’s stated that a lawyer would be provide for anyone and if they cannot afford one will be appointed for them. I’m not saying that he wasn’t fully but I still feel he should have at least met with a lawyer at least once. Haggard002
ReplyDeleteI find this article appalling on how they did not let his appointed lawyer speak to him. I think they were stalling to bring up evidence against him to prove he’s more guilty of the three crimes convicted against him. Denying the lawyer not to speak to him was wrong. To me his right were violated just because the other prosecutor stalled to not let him see his lawyer, by making up excuses. Since he was charged by three different prosecutors: the United States attorneys in Manhattan and New Jersey, for his alleged role in the bombings; and the Union County, N.J, prosecutor, for allegedly trying to kill police officers who tracked him down on Monday in the city of Linden. They should have let the lawyer see him. The lawyer said in the article that he couldn't see him cause he was not able to speak. I find this a lie to give them time to make their case and less time for him to make a defense for him. Adelle002
ReplyDeleteAfter reading about Ahmad Khan Raham and him being accused of domestic terrorism, is still feel like he deserved to be treated as a equal person. Everyone no matter what actions they took deserve to have equal right. Yes, he was accused of terrorism, but there was no proof that he was the one who committed the crime. As for being questioned in the ambulance and not being read the Miranda rights could of got someone into a mess with taking those actions. I'm not saying that he wasn't the one carrying the bombs i'm just saying that he deserved t be treating as a equal citizen. he should of been able to see a lawyer but he was denied that also. AW002
ReplyDeleteAccording to the Constitution of the United States all are suspect to equal representation. The case workers are directly violating the constitution. I feel like there is a whole other side to this that the public is not seeing. Also, it is mandatory to read Miranda to all... This case needs a revamp as soon as possible or the case may be dropped! OASIS_002
DeleteI found this article to be very interesting and eye opening to events that are currently taking place in the United States. The courts denied the suspect any rights to representation. Which, cannot take place according to the fourth amendment. The suspect still deserves equal representation, without taking into account any outside variables.The hospital is stating that he is not physically able to see an attorney due to his condition, however I feel like they are just jumping to conclusions and working against the suspect. I want to know what is really happening with the case, not just what the media is telling me. oasis_002
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about Ahmad Khan Raham, who is accused of domestic terrorism. He has not received the same equal rights in a criminal case that everyone else has access too. I really do not feel any remorse for him not having the same rights as everyone because of the acts he did that could have resulted in many deaths. However, I do see the argument that he deserves the same rights as any other person charged in a crime. He also should have been read his Miranda rights before being questioned in the ambulance. This problem could create a lot of hot water for the people in charge of the situation. When it comes to the lack of representation for the suspect in the hospital, officials claim that he is not physically capable of seeing an attorney right now. This could be just due to officials claiming this and in fact actually working against the suspect. Even though he is a suspect in a bombing, he should be treated as an equal citizen. According to the Constitution, everybody, terrorist or not, are suspect to equal representation. Steve002
ReplyDelete