@Ludovico34a@hoodwild_ Judges interpret the constitution. Salinas was a SCOTUS case, so it was multiple judges. I’m not defending the decision, but generally yes I agree with the principles of Marbury v Madison and constitutional judicial review, flawed as they are…
@BogusPogus15@hoodwild_ I haven’t dug that deep into the parameters of Salinas, as I don’t practice crim law regularly. People reading this need a rule to follow: “I decline to answer any questions on advice of counsel. I do not consent to any searches or seizures. I want a lawyer.” And say nothing else
@Ludovico34a@hoodwild_ Sort of. A quick-and-dirty explanation of the rule is that if you don’t say you’re being silent bc of your constitutional rights, the prosecutor can say to the jury that any reasonable, innocent person would’ve spoken up. If you cite your rights, that argument is disallowed.
@BigYellowTaxi6@hoodwild_ I was giving an example. Any method of invoking the right is sufficient. You don’t need to name the 5th Amendment specifically. “Constitutional rights,” “right to remain silent,” or “on advice of counsel.” None of this applies to the UK, but the video was US-based. Take care!
@SuperJohnNorman @hoodwild_ Decline to answer questions and specifically cite your constitutional rights as the reason. Google Salinas v. Texas to understand why.
@BigYellowTaxi6@hoodwild_ No it’s not. It’s “I invoke my constitutional rights and decline to answer any questions.” Please google “Salinas v. Texas” to understand why. IAAL.
@aurorafay1000 @GMHikaru@FIDE_chess Women simply don’t have the physicality to lift the chess pieces the same way as men. Like it or not this is biology.
@Sarvente0_0@BAD91BANG@EshaAA33 For MD and AS, you go left to right, rather than strictly multiplication always before decision and strictly addition always before subtraction