Stop the Presses! The Right to Remain Silent 9

We've come to the conclusion of this thread and the final comment I can make is simply, "I don't know."

     I don't know what will be the result of this Supreme Court decision.  I forsee that the job of prosecutors will be made easier.  I also forsee that people will inadvertently give away many of the freedoms they enjoy by "just talking" to the police or arresting agency or, worse yet, not talking before the person is arrested and Mirandized.  These statements, or lack of statements, can now be used against the person in prosecution and trial.

     I don't like to be a downer or a pessimist, but as a criminal defense attorney and certainly as a person who takes civil rights seriously, this will lead to problems.  I can only advise now that people, when they are detained, invoke specifically their 5th Amendment rights against self-incrimination and then see a lawyer ASAP.  However, how many of us know exactly what "magic verbage" to use upon detention to make certain that the 5th Amendment rights are invoked?

     Not many. 

     I will be keeping an eye on this as it develops.  So, of course, will a lot of other criminal defense attorneys, not to mention prosecutors.

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Stop the Presses! The Right to Remain Silent 8

OK - getting back to the issues with the Supreme Court decision. 

     The second issue that stands out is how can the average person possibly know that they need to invoke their 5th Amendment rights specifically before they can be protected by the right to remain silent?  Most people do not keep a copy of the Constitution on their person and it is unreasonable to assume that the average person will know exactly what verbage to state to invoke 5th Amendment protections. 

     As stated earlier in this thread, it is too early to state just what will be the effect of this new decision.  I can state without irony that the decision has thrown criminal-defense attorneys for a loop and we are still attempting to understand just where this will lead. 

     It is certain, however, that the legal landscape regarding the rights of the accused and the protections under the law have changed. 

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Stop the Presses! The Right to Remain Silent 7

An interesting take on the recent Supreme Court decision which is the topic of this thread from Slate magazine.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/06/salinas_v_texas_right_to_remain_silent_supreme_court_right_to_remain_silent.html

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Stop the Presses! The Right to Remain Silent 6

A view of the Salinas case from a libertarian viewpoint:

http://www.cato.org/blog/salinas-v-texas

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Stop the Presses! The Right to Remain Silent V

So, how will the recent Supreme Court decision of Salinas v. Texas affect future criminal prosecution?

    It is very difficult, of course, to tell the future from these cases.  Yet, if we are to read the Salinas decision on its face, it seems clear that if a person is simply detained by law enforcement but not placed under arrest (and also read his Miranda rights), then it is arguably clear that the person does not have the right to remain silent unless the detained person specifically invokes his 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination.

     And, once again from a plain reading of the case, it is arguably clear that the detained person must specifically state that he is invoking his 5th Amendment rights.  He cannot simply stay silent or say something to the effect that "I don't want to say anything."

     As a criminal defense attorney and fraud examiner, I can see several problems with this in terms of the rights of a detained person.  The first problem is obvious: why should the police bother to arrest the person at first and read Miranda warnings when they can just keep the person in detention, ask the person questions and, if the detained person refuses to answer the questions, this silence or lack of a response can be used against him?  This can lead to all sorts of issues for detained individuals who later are prosecuted.  Anything said (or not said) before being Mirandized can lead to this evidence being used against the person at trial.

     It would seem to me that this is an easy way for the police to collect information on a detained person without risk of having this evidence thrown out.

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Stop the Presses! The Right to Remain Silent 4

So, the recent decision by the Supreme Court seems to stand for the premise that if a person is detained by the police of other authority (Federal Marshalls, FBI, Texas Rangers, etc.), then the person must invoke his 5th Amendment rights against self incrimination by stating that he is invoking his 5th Amendment Rights to avoid his silence being used against him.

     From the reading of the Supreme Court's decision, this does not apply after the subject is arrested and Mirandized.  Once this happens, the person's silence cannot be used against him.  But, once again, this is after the person is arrested and Mirandized.  What occurs before this is apparently "fair game" unless, of course, the person being detained is smart enough to specifically invoke the 5th Amendment privilege.

     How does this affect arrests in the future?  Well, speaking as a criminal defense attorney and fraud examiner, it will have a tremendous effect on criminal prosecutions in the future. 

    We will discuss this tomorrow.

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Stop the Presses! The Right to Remain Silent 3

OK - now that we have been briefed on the Bill of Rights, what does this new Supreme Court decision really mean?

     It is impossible to say at this early stage of the game just how this will play out.  However, one item that clearly stands out is that now a person who is accused of a crime before he is read his Miranda Rights by an arresting officer may not have the "right" to remain silent.  The reason being is that, based on the reading of the Supreme Court decision, a person's silence before he is read his Miranda Rights may be used as evidence against him.

   In other words, if a person is stopped on suspicion of committing a criminal offense and is then asked questions by arresting officers but is not read his Miranda Rights (a common practice since a stop by arresting authorities does not automatically lead to an arrest), then the person's failure to make a statement may be introduced as evidence against him in a courtroom proceeding.

    Apparently, from reading the decision, the only way to stop this is to immediately invoke the 5th Amendment Right to keep silent.  At this point, once the right is invoked, this cannot be used against the person.

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Stop the Presses! The Right to Remain Silent 2

OK - this is going to take some time to examine.  For criminal defense attorneys like myself this is a big issue.  I am just going to take a moment today to explain to my readers from foreign countries the importance of "the right to remain silent" in American Criminal Law jurisprudence.

     The first 10 Amendments to the U.S. Constitution are known as the "Bill of Rights."  These are inalienable rights which enshrine certain rights to U.S. citizens that are non-negotiable.  They cannot be taken away.  This is not to say that these rights cannot be defined and litigated; this occurs all the time.  But, as stated, one of the basic premises of U.S. law is that these rights cannot be taken away by governmental authorities. 

   The 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads as follows:

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Although wordy, for criminal defense lawyers like myself, the most important statement in this Amendment is that no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be forced to testify against himself.  In other words, just because a person does not say anything regarding the offense, it CANNOT be used against him (i.e. as an admission of guilt).

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Stop the Presses! The Right to Remain Silent 1

OK - because of a new development, the thread concerning friends or loved ones taking advantage of a person will have to wait.

     The law is not static.  Changes in the law are occurring all the time.  Nowhere is this more visible then the United States Supreme Court.  Given that this is the highest court in the land, this is not surprising.

   Today the United States Supreme Court handed down a decision today which has enormous implications for the right to remain silent.

Here is the story.  We will discuss this in greater detail.

http://seattletimes.com/html/politics/2021208775_apussupremecourtsilence.html

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Here, Sign This! 1

We will begin a thread on another fraud topic, one that is extremely serious and affects tens of thousands of people, possibly more.

     What happens when a loved one, or someone we trust, asks us to sign a document without reading it or not allowing us to really understand what we are signing?  I am not talking about a stranger asking you to sign something without getting a second opinion or someone you don't know asking - we all should know by now that this should set off alarm bells.  I am instead asking what happens if a husband, wife, close relative, close friend, someone you trust is asking you to sign a document without giving you the opportunity to review it or get a second opinion.

     The abuse of trust is something which is tragic to describe and equally tragic in its consequences.  However, this entire blog is devoted to fraud - the use of trust to get a person to perform an action.  In this instance, it is someone we trust who is taking advantage of us.

     We will explore this topic over the next few days.

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

A glimpse into a new type of fraud

Kickstarter is a great program.  But, like everything else, it is not immune to fraud.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/kickstarter-almost-enabled-120-000-172312039.html

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Businessman charged with bribery in the Western District

A businessman faces bribery charges in a case in the Western District of Texas

http://www.justice.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/2013/Mav%20Co%20Castillon%20indictment.pdf

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Procurement Fraud in the Western District

Government Procurement fraud in the Western District of Texas

http://www.justice.gov/usao/txw/press_releases/2013/Mav%20Co%20Chavez%20plea.pdf

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Tax Return Fraud in the Northern District

Tax Return Fraud in the Northern District of Texas

http://www.justice.gov/usao/txn/PressRelease/2013/JUN2013/jun10turner_tommy_tax_fraud_sen.html

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Student Aid Fraud in the Eastern District

Student Aid fraud in the Eastern District of Texas

http://www.justice.gov/usao/txe/News/2013/edtx-ritch-053113.html

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

Healthcare Fraud in the Southern District

Healthcare (Durable Medical Equipment) Fraud in the Southern District of Texas

http://www.justice.gov/usao/txs/1News/Releases/2013%20June/130606%20-%20Shittu.html

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Mortgage Fraud in the Southern District

Mortgage Fraud in the Southern District of Texas

http://www.justice.gov/usao/txs/1News/Releases/2013%20June/130606%20-%20Davis.html

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Medical Fraud in the Southern District

Medical Fraud in the Southern District of Texas

http://www.justice.gov/usao/txs/1News/Releases/2013%20June/130603%20-%20Sharma.html

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

A cautionary tale

We will be exploring this topic in the next thread in this blog.

Spouses, friends and family members can be used for white collar crime.....and not even know it.

But, as they say, ignorance of the law is no excuse.  A jail sentence is still waiting at the end.

http://www.learnvest.com/2013/05/my-husband-embezzled-millions-and-i-paid-the-price/

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk

 

Chasing Madoff: The Movie

Finally had a chance to see this movie.  Great flick - highly recommended.  I've posted previously about Harry Markopolous who is the proverbial "real American hero" for going after Madoff with the tenacity he did (which was often a thankless job). 

Check it out if you have the time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chasing_Madoff

NOTE: THE INFORMATION IN THIS BLOG IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE NOR IS IT INTENDED TO BE LEGAL ADVICE.  IF THE READER HAS ANY LEGAL QUESTIONS, PLEASE REFER TO AN ATTORNEY.

                                             

http://www.tauskvega.com

 

----------à>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>gene tausk