Holder: No need to read Miranda rights to bin Laden if captured – Afghanistan Crossroads - CNN.com Blogs
Attorney General Holder has stated that OBL would not be necessary read his Miranda Rights if he were taken alive.
do you agree with AG Holders' views?
I was under the impression that every man had the right to be read his Miranda Rights regardless of whether they'd confessed to any crime or not. It seems that OBL's guilt and implication in 911 is pretty clear, but if the Obama adminstration takes shortcuts like these, what makes it better than the Bush adminstration?
Quote:
WASHINGTON - Attorney General Eric Holder said Wednesday there would be no need to read Miranda rights to Osama bin Laden if the al Qaeda leader were captured.
Holder told a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing that enough evidence exists against bin Laden to convict him in a trial, so that advising him of his rights to protect the legal admissibility of subsequent interrogation was unnecessary.
Here is a transcript of the exchange:
Holder: With regard to Bin Laden, there would be no need to give bin Laden Miranda warnings, and if I was not clear there, I meant to be. If he were captured I cannot foresee any reason why
Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama: But Mr. Holder, your presumption is in your own report that they would be tried in civilian courts. Why wouldn't you give Miranda warnings? What reason is there not to do so, unless you're going to try them in military commissions?
Holder: The concern with Miranda warnings is only whether or not the information you get from that person might be excluded. We have sufficient information, statements from bin Laden, so that there is no reason to Mirandize him at all.
|