Do you understand your Miranda rights

Miranda v. Arizona, the case established the doctrine of the "Miranda rights." In 1963 Ernesto Miranda was arrested, an Arizona man on charges of kidnapping and raping a 18-year-old woman. While he was being questioned, confessed to Miranda, the crime and this evidence was later used to convict him. After several complaints, the court case was brought before the U.S. Supreme. The court ruled that the police had to inform Miranda of his right to remain silent and the right to aAttorney, the confession that was obtained during the interview was inadmissible as evidence because it violated Miranda's constitutional rights.

The Miranda rights are a reflection of the two rights guaranteed to all citizens by the U.S. Constitution: the right to self-incrimination and the right to avoid legal representation. The right to self load, commonly referred to as the right to remain silent is guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. This right is also the originthe phrase "plead the fifth." The right to counsel prevents people taken advantage of by police and prosecutors. If you are arrested, you have the right to a lawyer before answering questions. These two rights were established long before the Miranda case, but the details of the case resulted in the ruling that defendants must be informed before being questioned about their rights. The police needed "to read anyone their rights" beforequestioning them, otherwise the information obtained from interrogations is inadmissible in court.

The proper Miranda warning provides the following information. "All have the right to remain silent, and what can you say will be used in court against you, you have the right lawyer to talk to a lawyer and have to take one. During any questioning. If you can not afford a lawyer, is it costs government to be provided for you. "

This passage is heardTelevision, in movies, books, and is often taken for granted, but these Miranda rights are important who has ever been or ever be accused of a crime. If you have been accused of a crime to understand that you have the right to remain silent. Although you may be tempted to defend themselves against police accusations that it is in your best interest to follow the officers' commands and silent. In cooperation with police warnings and commands does not mean that youguilty. There is enough time to defend your case when you are talking to a lawyer. Let an experienced defender in criminal cases to fight your battles for you, so you do not make the mistake of self-incriminating, or providing authorities with verbal evidence used against you.

Friends Link : cheap lg lcd tv review

The Tarasoff decision

Tatiana Tarasoff and Prosenjit Poddar were both students at the University of California at Berkeley when they met for the first time at a folk dance class in 1968. He was a 26-year-old student in shipbuilding, which had grown in India as part of the untouchable caste Dalits and little experience with dating or American customs. She was a bachelor and, while not from multiple view of the relationship as serious. Poddar grew angrywith their efforts to terminate their relationships with other people to be and was obsessed with her. In his efforts to rekindle their relationship, he was put down, neglected his studies was often seen crying and began acting in general in a bizarre manner. He spoke with a friend about blowing up her dorm room and was advised to seek counseling at the University Health Service.

While Tatiana went to Brazil to spend the summer with an aunt, visited Poddar therapyStaff psychologist, Dr. Lawrence Moore. In the course of the treatments, he showed violent fantasies against Tatiana including getting a gun and shoots her (while he never called in the meetings, it was easy to see). Due to concerns about Poddar said Dr. Moore-campus police, who picked him up, but later released after he promised to keep him away from Tatiana. Dr. Moore's supervisor, Dr. Harvey Powelson asked staff to refrain from further testshospitalizing at Poddar. Poddar never again to treatment, and neither Tatiana nor their parents received a warning that Poddar was a potential threat.

In the weeks before Tatiana return from Brazil, Poddar moved in with her brother, who had hurt no idea that he intended to his sister. On 27 October 1969, shortly after her return, Poddar went to her house and stabbed her to death with a kitchen knife. Then he called the police and asked to be handcuffed.

Tatiana's parentsfiled lawsuits against the campus police, health and Regents of the University of California will be warned for failing to provide. The first attempt was on the ground that there is no reason to complain as the therapist's primary responsibility was the patient rejected as a third party. After the appeals court supported the decision of the Court case was taken to the California Supreme.

It was in 1974 that the Tarasoff decision was first handed down.In this landmark decision, the Court held that the therapist is to provide a duty of reasonable care persons exposed to such a warning, that they bear to avert foreseeable danger from the patient's mental state. Since that decision now to run the police and mental health professionals were obligated to warn potential victims, the case was sent by the California Supreme Court in 1976. The revised decision noted that while the police could not be held liable, physicians were required to warnpotential victims because of the "special relationship between a patient and his doctor or psychotherapist." In an often quoted statement by Justice Matthew Tobriner presented the majority opinion: ""... the confidentiality of patient-psychotherapist communications must provide to the extent that the disclosure of material in order to avert dangers to others. The protective privilege ends where the public danger begins. "

Since 1976, the Tarasoff decision has been challenged numerous legalSettings and has at least 17 U.S. states (rejected the states of Florida, Texas, South Carolina and Virginia have the decision) has been confirmed. Later decisions have the scope of the Tarasoff decision is limited to only a duty to identifiable victims, ie, potential victims, which could be easily set to warn of the information available to patients identified. The Tarasoff was very influential in non-US jurisdictions, and (here in Canada, psychotherapists are encouraged tofollow the Tarasoff rules, although it has no official weight in Canadian law).

What Prosenjit Poddar, he was knocked over four years by a five-year prison sentence for manslaughter, which was later on a technicality for improper jury instructions on diminished. To avoid a new trial, agreed to return to India Poddar. Based on available reports, he is now happily married.

Friends Link : cheap lg lcd tv review

Is There Truth in Interpretation? Law, Literature and History

Ronald Dworkin, professor of jurisprudence at University College London and the New York University School of Law, delivers the inaugural Frederic R. and Molly S. Kellogg Biennial Lecture on Jurisprudence in the Coolidge Auditorium of the Library of Congress. Speaker Biography: Born in Worcester, Mass., Ronald Dworkin was educated at Harvard University and Magdalen College, Oxford, where he was a Rhodes Scholar and a student of prominent British lawyer and academic Sir Rupert Cross. Dworkin attended Harvard Law School and subsequently clerked for Judge Learned Hand of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. A former professor of jurisprudence at the University of Oxford, Dworkin is widely known as one of the foremost American legal philosophers. He is the author of many articles in philosophical and legal journals and has written numerous books, as well as articles on legal and political topics in the New York Review of Books. In 2007, Dworkin was awarded the Holberg Memorial Prize in the Humanities by the Kingdom of Norway.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=742JyiqLhuk&hl=en

Tags : cheap lg lcd tv review

Ayodhya verdict: Ravi Shankar Prasad appeals to Muslim friends

Not as a BJP leader or as senior lawyer but as a citizen of India I appeal to my Muslim friends to accept the Ayodhya verdict, says Lawyer and BJP leader Ravi Shankar Prasad.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYuabDuQ2n0&hl=en

My Links : cheap lg lcd tv review