wheredanton
Retired
It seems like miranda is proposing a system that would allow police officers to determine someones guilt and then stick them in an interview view and keep them there for as long as it takes and with any methods possible to ensure that that persons view of events (ie he did it) squares with the police's then and there judgement that the person is guilty.SMH said:Most police officers go into their job because they want to protect good people from bad people. But that is way to simple an aim for today's justice system.
Spare a thought for the WA police who arrested the then 18 year old Dante Wyndham Aruthurs three years ago - three years before he alledgedly raped and strangled an 8 year old...
Aruthurs has been charged with murder. But in 2003 the police suspected that he was responsibile for an indecent assault on another 8 year old girl in a park, the Age reported. He was questioned for hours, before alledgedly confessing. But charges were droppedafter the WA's DPP found the interview would be inadmissible in court because the officers had been too aggresive. Aruthurs walked and the police were disciplined.
Whoes morality does that twisted outcome serve? And we wonder why police take sickleave. They're heartsick'
She notes that the WA DPP didnt even both to take it to court because on first signting the videotaped confession deemed 'too aggressive' (earlier in this thread frog said that the admission was deemed inadmissible because the police officers did something that impacted on the accused persons ability to rationally respond to the questioning). If that was the case it must have been pretty bad clearly an involuntary confession. If it was borderline I'm sure the WA DPP would have taken it to court and argued that it wasn't involuntary.
Last edited: