586
He took it literally
(thelemmy.club)
cross-posted from: https://lemdro.id/post/28115777
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2026
586 points (98.8% liked)
Greentext
7788 readers
1418 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This is not entirely accurate.
If you clam up pre-Miranda warning, it can be used against you (if you didn’t specifically exercise your rights).
Case law about this: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/570/178/
Post-Miranda warning, there’s no issue. The warning literally advises you of your right to be silent.
That's not entirely accurate:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berghuis_v._Thompkins
Your fifth amendment rights haven't been invoked until you say so. The Miranda warning isn't a guide for how to invoke the rights, just a notification that you have them.
Now, it's ridiculous that we've ended up here and it was a terrible ruling, both of them, but if you're just quiet you haven't invoked your right to silence anymore than you've invoked your right to legal counsel.
Which is a hell of a position for the court to take on coerced confessions.
It seems that you can't invoke your rights pre-Miranda and before arrest, as seen in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salinas_v._Texas
I don't know how that works specifically, but I expect nobody will allow you ~~more~~ your rights whenever they can