Steve Chapman points out the absolute idiocy of the most recent US Supreme Court concerning self-incrimination
Two police officers stopped and frisked Martinez, a farm worker, while looking for drug activity. They found a knife in his waistband, a struggle ensued, and one of the officers shot him five times. One bullet tore into his face, permanently blinding him. One shattered his spine, paralyzing his legs for life. Three hit him in the leg.
After being placed under arrest, he was rushed by ambulance to an emergency room. But his wounds were just the start of his ordeal. Yet another officer, Sgt. Ben Chavez, went along to the hospital and proceeded to pelt Martinez with questions about the incident, even as doctors and nurses labored furiously to keep him alive. Several times they asked the cop to leave the room, but each time, he came back, turned on his tape recorder and resumed his interrogation.
Bleeding from multiple wounds, choking, unable to move, occasionally losing consciousness, in excruciating pain and afraid he was dying, the patient twice told Chavez he didn’t want to talk–even though the officer hadn’t bothered to inform him of his Miranda rights, and even though he feared he might be denied treatment for refusing. But not until 45 minutes later, when the medical team wheeled Martinez out to undergo a CAT scan, did Chavez finally conclude his questioning.
You would assume this sort of mistreatment, verging on deliberate torture, would be a flagrant violation of Martinez’s constitutional rights. But we learned in a decision issued Monday that the Supreme Court doesn’t see it quite that way. "Martinez’s allegations fail to state a violation of his constitutional rights," wrote Justice Clarence Thomas, including his 5th Amendment right against forced testimony.