You seriously didn't know this? It's right there in the Miranda warning given to suspects:
You have the right to remain silent; Anything you say can and will be used against you; You have the right to an attorney
If a suspect chooses to talk without a lawyer it's 100% admissible.
Not if they're crazy or stupid and clearly don't understand their rights it isn't.
You seriously don't know this?
Depape
1. Was caught on video breaking into the house
2. Was then caught red-handed by police in the act of bashing in Pelosi's skull with a hammer
3. After having been read his rights, declined a lawyer and confessed to the above
I think it's about time to throw in the towel on your conspiracy theory and admit defeat. As far as an insanity defense, that's a high bar to meet in California thanks to the backlash from Dan White and the Twinkie Defense. Even if he is found insane, it doesn't change any of the facts of what happened.
Banning contraception is extreme politically but it's a very rare position for a Republican to promote. I can't think of any.
195 Republicans in the House voted against a bill to codify the right to contraception in the United States.
Blake Masters, GOP candidate for Senate, stated that he will only support future Supreme Court candidates who would rule in favor of overturning Connecticut vs Griswold, the case that made contraception legal nationwide. Marsha Blackburn also denounced the same ruling, and Mississippi Governor Reeves said that he couldn't rule out a state wide ban on contraception if the ruling is overturned.
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
Democrats in the mainstream all support the opposite extreme which is abortion right up until birth.
Complete lie. Any support for abortion beyond the previous Roe standard of viability is for cases of severe abnormalities and cases in with the mother's life is at risk.
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
The objections to gay marriage are religious.
No one is making them get married. You can object to interfaith marriages or blood transfusions based on your beliefs. That doesn't mean you get to enforce your beliefs on everyone else and stop them for doing those things.
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
Personally, I don't see why any gay person would insist on being included in a religious ceremony from religions that declare them damned by birth.
Ask your gay friends. See what they tell you.
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
Republicans ban books that strangers use to sexualize other people's children.
Acknowledging that gay and trans people exist isn't sexualizing children any more than acknowledging that straight and cis people exist.
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
Democrats ban Mark Twain and To Kill a Mockingbird.
Notoriously liberal Mississippi banned "To Kill a Mockingbird." I disagree with that.
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
The Republicans advocate for smaller government because government is inherently wasteful and corrupt. Democrats think the government is the answer to every problem.
Somehow Trump's smaller government managed to make the deficit explode from 2017-19. But that's ok. He didn't care because he was cutting taxes for all the rich people.
Government isn't the answer to everything. But a good one can do things that the private sector can't.
Joe Manchin is from Kentucky. He will not win re-election. He's done as a Democrat.
I was sure he was from West Virginia, but since you're an expert on everything, sure.
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
Bill Clinton could not win a primary anywhere in America today. Why you think this is evidence that Democrats are diverse is beyond me.
Bill Clinton is a Democrat. AOC is a Democrat. Joe Manchin is a Democrat. These three are not all the same. Just like the 81 million Americans who voted Democrat in 2020 don't all agree on the same things. You struggle to understand that.
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
People in nursing homes with no vote guardianships should not be voting.
I agree on people who have been documented to have decaying mental states, many of whom are in nursing homes. These cases were few in number and did not determine the winner of Wisconsin.
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
Ballots could not be rejected for signatures.
Do you know why? Because Pennsylvania wasn't employing forensic handwriting experts to analyze signatures.
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
Every name on the voter rolls got a ballot mailed to them whether they were still eligible to vote or not.
From your own link:
TheAdultInTheRoom's link says:
Rep. Boyle's bill would send a pre-paid mail-in ballot APPLICATION automatically to every registered voter in Pennsylvania.
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
Trump is an egomaniac. He wants to be loved and he wants to be remembered as a great president. It's in his interest to do what's best for the country.
Trump wants approval but he doesn't care if he's actually helping anyone besides himself.
TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:
Biden is a corrupt AF. If the Biden DoJ and FBI weren't corrupt AF his kid would already be in prison and he'd be under indictment. I don't like Trump but he is head and shoulders better than a career politician with zero accomplishments in 50 years other than stealing a ton of money.
Facts are beyond you. Trump doesn't care about rules, laws or decorum. Biden's a run of the mill career politician. Trump's a crook who would sell out his family and his country to benefit himself.
Yes, Manchin is from WV my bad. Regardless, he's from a state that is decidedly red. He will not be re-elected.
Bill Clinton can call himself a Democrat all he wants. If he ran for office on the same opinions he had in the 90's he couldn't win a primary.
Manchin is a moderate today and he is left of Clinton. Manchin would get laughed out of the room in any blue state in the country.
AOC would laughed out of the room in any red or purple state in the country. In addition to being painfully stupid, she's an extremist.
Do you think banks employ forensic handwriting experts to cash checks? Signature verification software is easy to come by. Democrats oppose voter ID and signatures for 1 obvious reason.
Trump didn't break any laws. Biden has broken dozens. Hunter is going to prison and Biden's dirty laundry will come out. I hope the scumbag lives long enough to see it happen.
You seriously didn't know this? It's right there in the Miranda warning given to suspects:
You have the right to remain silent; Anything you say can and will be used against you; You have the right to an attorney
If a suspect chooses to talk without a lawyer it's 100% admissible.
Not if they're crazy or stupid and clearly don't understand their rights it isn't.
You seriously don't know this?
^^^^^^
Recently born again civil libertarian. Probably a temporary one too. His passion for enforcing Miranda rights will die when this thread does.
Stupid is no excuse, by the way. You can't exclude evidence or defend criminal charges by claiming stupidity.
DiPope gets to put in his mental competency down the road. His lawyer, Adam Lipson, all but promised that insanity/mental incompetence is a defense he's going to run. (What choice does he have in view of the confession and videos?) It's not going to change the status of DiPope's confession.
Some of you (2-3 of you posting under 6-7 names) really want this DiPope guy to be acquitted or exonerated. It's perplexing. Related to the guy or something? Love guys who write blogs on the internet?
Not if they're crazy or stupid and clearly don't understand their rights it isn't.
You seriously don't know this?
Depape
1. Was caught on video breaking into the house
2. Was then caught red-handed by police in the act of bashing in Pelosi's skull with a hammer
3. After having been read his rights, declined a lawyer and confessed to the above
I think it's about time to throw in the towel on your conspiracy theory and admit defeat. As far as an insanity defense, that's a high bar to meet in California thanks to the backlash from Dan White and the Twinkie Defense. Even if he is found insane, it doesn't change any of the facts of what happened.
I've never once said he didn't do it.
I was just pointing out that your smug declaration about Miranda rights and confessions was incorrect.
Not if they're crazy or stupid and clearly don't understand their rights it isn't.
You seriously don't know this?
^^^^^^
Recently born again civil libertarian. Probably a temporary one too. His passion for enforcing Miranda rights will die when this thread does.
Stupid is no excuse, by the way. You can't exclude evidence or defend criminal charges by claiming stupidity.
DiPope gets to put in his mental competency down the road. His lawyer, Adam Lipson, all but promised that insanity/mental incompetence is a defense he's going to run. (What choice does he have in view of the confession and videos?) It's not going to change the status of DiPope's confession.
Some of you (2-3 of you posting under 6-7 names) really want this DiPope guy to be acquitted or exonerated. It's perplexing. Related to the guy or something? Love guys who write blogs on the internet?
Confessions get thrown out all the time.
That doesn't remotely guarantee exoneration.
We can add the law to the extensive list of topics you are completely ignorant about.
Recently born again civil libertarian. Probably a temporary one too. His passion for enforcing Miranda rights will die when this thread does.
Stupid is no excuse, by the way. You can't exclude evidence or defend criminal charges by claiming stupidity.
DiPope gets to put in his mental competency down the road. His lawyer, Adam Lipson, all but promised that insanity/mental incompetence is a defense he's going to run. (What choice does he have in view of the confession and videos?) It's not going to change the status of DiPope's confession.
Some of you (2-3 of you posting under 6-7 names) really want this DiPope guy to be acquitted or exonerated. It's perplexing. Related to the guy or something? Love guys who write blogs on the internet?
Confessions get thrown out all the time.
No. No, they do not. Not even close. Extremely rare evidentiary ruling.
Another Coincidence wrote:
That doesn't remotely guarantee exoneration.
I never said it did. And it won't. DiPapi's confession is not going anywhere, and his chance of exoneration is in the small decimals.
What I DID say is that it perplexing why you, your socks, and 1-2 others want the guy to be exonerated so intensely. You like his blogs? You like underwear and hammers? I hope its not that you dislike the Pelosis so much that you want a violent criminal to escape punishment.
Another Coincidence wrote:
We can add the law to the extensive list of topics you are completely ignorant about.
Do it. Add it to the list. And when you need correcting on legal things, I'll still be here for you and the other people in your head.
I was just pointing out that your smug declaration about Miranda rights and confessions was incorrect.
Why are you the one who's upset, Adult? I was responding to Samantha Spade, not you.
Samantha was confused. She thought confessions without a lawyer present were somehow inadmissible. I was just correcting her. Samantha, do you care to comment?
No. No, they do not. Not even close. Extremely rare evidentiary ruling.
Another Coincidence wrote:
That doesn't remotely guarantee exoneration.
I never said it did. And it won't. DiPapi's confession is not going anywhere, and his chance of exoneration is in the small decimals.
What I DID say is that it perplexing why you, your socks, and 1-2 others want the guy to be exonerated so intensely. You like his blogs? You like underwear and hammers? I hope its not that you dislike the Pelosis so much that you want a violent criminal to escape punishment.
Another Coincidence wrote:
We can add the law to the extensive list of topics you are completely ignorant about.
Do it. Add it to the list. And when you need correcting on legal things, I'll still be here for you and the other people in your head.
In addition to confessions being thrown out of court there are many instances where false confessions were given.
I was just pointing out that your smug declaration about Miranda rights and confessions was incorrect.
Why are you the one who's upset, Adult? I was responding to Samantha Spade, not you.
Samantha was confused. She thought confessions without a lawyer present were somehow inadmissible. I was just correcting her. Samantha, do you care to comment?
I was just pointing out that your smug declaration about Miranda rights and confessions was incorrect.
Why are you the one who's upset, Adult? I was responding to Samantha Spade, not you.
Samantha was confused. She thought confessions without a lawyer present were somehow inadmissible. I was just correcting her. Samantha, do you care to comment?
They should be.
Impaired, or youthful, or mentally challenged people cannot be expected to have the wherewithall to know enuff and be able to remain silent until given access to a lawyer.
Meanwhile it is illegal to lie to cops in many circumstances yet they can lie to you all they want.
