Mirandize or not? Boston Bombing Suspect

This is a volatile discussion because of the horrendous atrocity that took place in Boston. We saw a bomb sat behind the legs of an 8 year old little boy and his sister, taking his life and the leg of his sister. The horrific scene where too many lives lost and so many others changed forever brought heartbreak, disgust and anger to us all. We saw the reality of the war on terrorism we are in. We saw police officers and security personnel gunned down as suspects tried to escape capture. It is understandable for us to want the people responsible to pay for what they've done in the most horrible way the law will allow.

I have NO sympathy for bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his elder brother who was killed after a shoot out when his younger brother ran over him in his own attempt to escape capture. They made the conscience decision to kill and injure and based on reports it appears to be due to extremist terrorist views. Dzhokhar was a naturalized citizen of the United States. Upon his capture agents have chosen to use the "public safety" clause to delay reading him his Miranda rights and interrogate him first. I agree there is precedent for him to be charged as an enemy combatant, but is it the right thing to do?

He was awarded citizenship and all the rights that entails. (My issues with the path taken to give him citizenship I will save for another time) Does the fact he was not a natural citizen born here make a difference? I know it is easy to feel he abandoned the vows he took when he was sworn in at citizenship by his actions and therefore should have no rights, but what doors does this open? The fact is that because he wasn't read his Miranda rights doesn't mean he doesn't still have them but could it effect the use of his testimony at a later date? The overwhelming circumstantial evidence seems to secure a conviction in his case but what about future cases.

We have natural born citizens who decide to murder and just like Timothy McVeigh we have domestic terrorists among us. What about other cases? In recent times we've seen the govt want to change the constitution and take away rights we've enjoyed. With the onslaught of attack on gun rights what if they were to decide an individual who took up arms and shot a citizen could be tried as an enemy combatant? This is a slippery slope and once the bottom is reached it may be impossible to climb back up. Shouldn't we have confidence in our judicial system and remain faithful to the constitution and the right to legal counsel?

May God bless all the families of those lost, the injured and their families as well as the people of Boston. Huge gratitude to the officers and citizens who helped to capture the suspects. Prayers going up that justice will be served.


- Posted by Sherry Lucas using BlogPress for iPad.