-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Boston: One dead, one captured, city re-opened
- Thread starter Joel Was Right
- Start date
- Status
CHEEZMO
Obsidian fan
Fuckin Big Boss, man.
cheststrongwell
my cake, fuck off
Hey now guys, just asking questions. Can't even have a mature convo here anymore.
speculawyer
Member
Miranda is completely irrelevant at this point. There is more than enough evidence to nail him without his own statements.
That depends on which can carry the most false flags.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
This movie already sort of exists, and it's called The Life of David Gale
Plot spoilers:
David Gale is a college professor and anti-death penalty advocate. He has a debate with an advocate where he "loses" because he mentions the possibility of executing an innocent man but can't name a case of it happening. Shortly thereafter another anti-death penalty activist is raped and murdered and Gale is falsely accused--he had consentually slept with her, so there's DNA evidence linking him and convicting him. He is sentenced to death.
A journalist covers his case, as he asks her to seek evidence that exonerates him. She is unable to.
On the day of his execution, she discovers a tape that the activist who was murdered actually staged an elaborate suicide to make it look like a murder. She rushes to give the tape to the cops to exonerate Gale, but is just moments too late *rolleyes*. Gale is executed. The journalist publishes the tape, provoking a massive debate on the death penalty in light of the fact that an innocent man was clearly executed.
Much later on, the journalist receives a second tape which shows that Gale and the "murdered" activist had actually collaborated to stage the suicide--she had a terminal illness, he wanted to be falsely convicted to die for his cause
A journalist covers his case, as he asks her to seek evidence that exonerates him. She is unable to.
On the day of his execution, she discovers a tape that the activist who was murdered actually staged an elaborate suicide to make it look like a murder. She rushes to give the tape to the cops to exonerate Gale, but is just moments too late *rolleyes*. Gale is executed. The journalist publishes the tape, provoking a massive debate on the death penalty in light of the fact that an innocent man was clearly executed.
Much later on, the journalist receives a second tape which shows that Gale and the "murdered" activist had actually collaborated to stage the suicide--she had a terminal illness, he wanted to be falsely convicted to die for his cause
Not quite what you were asking for, but similar in terms of the way the twists serve the political point. Pretty gross movie though.
Link
The Autumn Wind
Questions about what, exactly? I'm still trying to figure out what that video even has to do with anything.
Exactly. So many people here, like you said, take TV police actions to be the spot-on truth. I wish some of that was the case. It would be nice if I could get DNA results back in 5 seconds, rather than 2 months.
Half and half
Member
Heh, thank you.
Fixed that for you.
Maninthemirror
Banned
was this posted?
Joel Was Right
Member
Has anyone seen the film Unthinkable starring Samuel L. Jackson, Carrie-Anne Moss and Michael Sheen?
I didn't have any issue with the optional shelter in place. It was indeed advised and not required. Businesses, schools, and citizens had the option to leave if they felt it was appropriate; the people believed their government's pleas and stayed indoors.
I do think raiding every home within an area of Watertown may have crossed a line though. I do believe the ability to raid each one was useful in the manhunt, and that most people would have willingly allowed their homes to be entered into in the scenario that occurred.
However, at what point is a warrant necessary and what are the limits of probable cause in raiding an entire neighborhood of homes? How wide a range can we claim probable cause in search and seizure of private residences without need of a warrant?
Perhaps there is something I'm not fully grasping that makes the actions in Watertown legally acceptable. Lets imagine a few scenarios:
1) An individual in the Watertown neighborhood was an accomplice of the two terrorists and white hat was heading in that direction for a safe house. If said accomplice, unknown as of then to the police, had requested his home not be searched, would law enforcement still have had reason to claim probable cause in this case? Would they have needed to go seek a warrant at this point?
2) In DC during the DC Sniper threat, the local government never utilized warrantless search of private residences over an entire neighborhood. Did the government have the legal ability to? Is there any threshold crossed by the Boston events that makes it different from the DC Sniper?
3) Lets rewind a decade or two. Whitey Bulger is hiding somewhere within South Boston, and his group is still actively involved in organized crime. What is the reason that every home in Watertown can be searched for White Hat, but not every home can be searched in pursuit of Whitey? What is the legal reasoning that makes these different? I would assume the layman's reasoning would be that White Hat was considered an immediate threat to general civilians with the use of explosives while Whitey was not involved with killing general civilians. We could argue the actions of both are imminent threats. Both were wanted by the FBI. Both were involved in murder.
4) Let's imagine the ownership or use of pornography was illegal, and while on the hunt for White Hat, the police encounter this in an unrelated person's home:
Could someone help with my understanding of each of these scenarios, and what makes each of them different from the Watertown case?
I do think raiding every home within an area of Watertown may have crossed a line though. I do believe the ability to raid each one was useful in the manhunt, and that most people would have willingly allowed their homes to be entered into in the scenario that occurred.
However, at what point is a warrant necessary and what are the limits of probable cause in raiding an entire neighborhood of homes? How wide a range can we claim probable cause in search and seizure of private residences without need of a warrant?
Perhaps there is something I'm not fully grasping that makes the actions in Watertown legally acceptable. Lets imagine a few scenarios:
1) An individual in the Watertown neighborhood was an accomplice of the two terrorists and white hat was heading in that direction for a safe house. If said accomplice, unknown as of then to the police, had requested his home not be searched, would law enforcement still have had reason to claim probable cause in this case? Would they have needed to go seek a warrant at this point?
2) In DC during the DC Sniper threat, the local government never utilized warrantless search of private residences over an entire neighborhood. Did the government have the legal ability to? Is there any threshold crossed by the Boston events that makes it different from the DC Sniper?
3) Lets rewind a decade or two. Whitey Bulger is hiding somewhere within South Boston, and his group is still actively involved in organized crime. What is the reason that every home in Watertown can be searched for White Hat, but not every home can be searched in pursuit of Whitey? What is the legal reasoning that makes these different? I would assume the layman's reasoning would be that White Hat was considered an immediate threat to general civilians with the use of explosives while Whitey was not involved with killing general civilians. We could argue the actions of both are imminent threats. Both were wanted by the FBI. Both were involved in murder.
4) Let's imagine the ownership or use of pornography was illegal, and while on the hunt for White Hat, the police encounter this in an unrelated person's home:
Replace ownership or use of pornography with hard drugs, or with running a meth lab, or filming child pornography. Typically in cases of warranted search of one's home, finding of other incriminating activities unrelated to the original crime can be also tried in court using the evidence found in the warranted search. In the case of a wide range probable cause-based warrantless search of an entire neighborhood for a suspect, would the police be able to utilize whatever evidence was found against the unrelated person? And if that evidence can be used, what is to stop the government from taking advantage of other undesired events, such as serial killers. In the pursuit of a serial killer, the government could claim 1) he was pursued to the neighborhood of the home or offices of a political opponent and is believed to still be somewhere within it, and 2) a warrantless search of the political opponent's neighborhood is required to find the serial killer. In the search, the government purposely searches more extensively political opponents in hopes of incriminating them.
Could someone help with my understanding of each of these scenarios, and what makes each of them different from the Watertown case?
EdibleExplosives
Member
This is amazing.
That is correct, but at the same time they might care more about getting info on possible supporters or other background details/infrastructure, instead of trying to get a confession out of him.
With all the hard evidence (camera footage, blood, DNA evidence and so forth), they probably feel they have a strong enough case to not have to worry about going through the normal steps and getting him to confess to anything.
Maninthemirror
Banned
new pics
freenudemacusers
Member
Can you provide evidence that homes were raided vs voluntarily opened for investigation?
Jean Valjean
Member
was this posted?
Weid... that's a much more clear view of the brothers than in the pictures the FBI released..
Half and half
Member
was this posted?
Man, I can't get over how white hat left his face exposed like that. Guess he didn't read the manual like black hat did.
Once people knew who to look for, there are greater chances of finding in someone's higher quality photos.
Some pictures from last night. Sorry for the quality. Iphone cameras suck in the dark.
Awesome video of the celebration on Mission Hill here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oAf1RdurYs
First heard news of a big crowd at Hemenway Street. The crowd was a lot bigger but the police told us to disperse to keep the road opened. People were thanking the cops in the cruisers. A Transit Police cruiser rolled up beside me and my friends and yelled "DRINK ALL THE BEER!" Couldn't believe it when I first heard it haha.
Video: http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-961342
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10200465366690465&set=vb.1045882421&type=2&theater
The Gazebo at the Common. I'm the one with the backpack next to my friend with the Celtics jersey.
Inside Gazebo. There was a guy with a boombox playing Sweet Caroline, Dirty Water, Shipping up the Boston, and the national anthem. Loved the people singing along. Lots of USA and more importantly, BPD chants.
Massive props to the BPD, Watertown PD, Cambridge PD, and all other law enforcement and national guard that got called up to the area on Friday. They seemed to be enjoying watching everyone celebrate and appreciated all the thanks they were getting. I'm in the Bruins shirt.
It's a shame I didn't hear about the big gathering on Mission Hill. It's a huge college neighborhood, I'll be living there next year. It seemed like it was awesome from the pictures ive seen.
Awesome video of the celebration on Mission Hill here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8oAf1RdurYs
cheststrongwell
my cake, fuck off
Probably found after the press conference.
Winterfang
Banned
Surely she was fucking with you... right? :/
I wish, we where talking about movies with a friend(the friend turn out to be a Thruther) and she mentioned this amazing documentary that changed her life and then she started babbling about the Merman nonsense, she actually convinced that other friend to watch the movie.
Both are Lesbians so maybe there's a chance they saw the movie together and had hot wild nasty sex crazy sex, so the whole evening wasn't a waste.
Yeah but the public safety exemption only grants them 48 hours from time of arrest, and he's going to be in the hospital for pretty much all of that. Republicans want to move him over to military control they don't have to give him rights and that's fucking bullshit because he's a US citizen. Even if he ties to al-Qaeda (and I doubt he does) he still has rights as a us citizen and should be treated as such.
I was thinking during the boat thing how amazing it would be if the dead brother's body was the one actually in the boat, because there was a mole in the police/morgue.
Winterfang
Banned
Those pics are awful but you where pretty drunk so I it's alright. Glad for the Cops, being a Cop is often a thankless job.
Link
The Autumn Wind
Haha, sounds like an episode of 24.
Actually, any answers to questions that adhere to the public safety exemption can be used in court.
Regardless, he already confessed that he was "the marathon bomber" to the guy they stole the vehicle from. So this whole Miranda thing is all about the principal of the matter. It really won't make any difference in this specific case.
Nope, that's the whole problem with not mirandizing him. He has no right to silence and everything he says can still be used in court.
From what I've heard on the news, the public safety exemption doesn't have a set time limit. It's flexible.
And if he has ties to al-qaeda then they can legally make him an "enemy combatant", since they are part of the war on terror. This applies to citizens. Obama hasn't changed this.
That does not make it right. US courts are far more effective then military tribunals anyway going by the track records. He should have a public defender, no need for all this shady bullshit.
Joel Was Right
Member
I heard earlier that someone who knew the elder brother saw a change in him after 2009, that he became more religious and political after meeting another man (forgot his background). Has anyone come across similar accounts today? The suggestion is, of course, someone in the states may have had an direct role in influencing them
Who said he wouldn't have a public defender? He's going to court. Obama administration already said he would be tried as a criminal, not an enemy combatant.
(unless of course he says Al-Qaeda ties or something, like Scrooged said, but that's probably not the case here)
Johnny Cage In The Shower
Member
So does anyone have Obamas' post events address handy? a YT link or something?
SniperHunter
Banned
i like the music in that vid, track name?
Ah I had no idea about that part.
They won't allow him one right now because of "public safety".
So one of the people taken into custody that was a roommate had a vanity plate that says Terrorista #1. All 3 of them seem to be from the same region of the world as the bombers. Be curious about the money trail behind all these people. Its amazing how a bunch of refugees can afford Mercedes and BMWs etcs.
TimeEffect
Member
I'm a critical thinker man, I ask a lot of questions, and that's my proof bro, open your mind, wake the fuck up, I'm more enlightened than you guys because I don't take shit from the government
SniperHunter
Banned
thnx
LowParry
Member
Ya know thinking on the whole car shooting, suspect #2 got away with probably no gunshot wounds at all. Must of been -the- luckiest man alive. His gunshot wounds most likely happened at the time of the second shooting with the curfew was lifted.
But man, wherever the hell he was hiding was good enough for the search to miss out on him. Guy could of just stayed there for a day then walked on out in the middle of the night.
But man, wherever the hell he was hiding was good enough for the search to miss out on him. Guy could of just stayed there for a day then walked on out in the middle of the night.
Why? They can get jobs and earn money like everybody else.
When the guy that called it in did so, he made note of there being a "bloody mess" in the boat.
Well I agree with you. There's no reason at this time for McCain and the others to be calling for him to be an enemy combatant. I wouldn't call it "shady" though. Just misplaced.
Using the public safety exemption before reading Miranda is the best way to go.
- Status