'Serenity'
Discussion of episodes currently airing in Un-American locations (anything that's aired in Australia is fair game), as well as anything else the Un-Americans feel like talking about or we feel like asking them. Please use the show discussion threads for any current-season discussion.
Add yourself to the Buffista map while you're here by updating your profile.
Is "gazumping" an actual legal term?
Now I'm imagining red-faced men in funny wigs saying it in great earnest.
No wonder you people spawned Monty Python.
But we don't refer to it as 'Mirandising' in the UK.
Do y'all name statutes after the cases that spawned them? Would you call it "That Bloody WOG Who Ruined All The Interrougation Fun"?
;-P
Is "gazumping" an actual legal term?
I think so. Not sure.
Would you call it "That Bloody WOG Who Ruined All The Interrougation Fun"?
Um. No. And we don't tend to name laws after the people who spawned them as often as you folks do, I think.
It's a very little known fact that 'being read the Riot Act' is actually named after a certain Lord Riot. (It was originally a Norman name.)
I want to be read the Rio Act.
BTW as I remember we didn't get the Miranda decision until 1966 in the U.S. Didn't the British custom of "warning" defendents occur much earlier - actually putting you ahead in one civil liberty?
serial:
I want to be read the Rio Act.
I want to watch Rio read you the Rio Act.
Probably ASSCAPS will be involved.
I think all legal warnings should start out, "HEY FUCKOS!"
I think all legal warnings should start out, "HEY FUCKOS!"
Heh. Legislation as well, if only in an attempt to make my Foundations reading more interesting.
In this part, FUCKOS are defined as you, dipshit, because we know that your smarmy-ass lawyers are just reading this thing to determine whether you can sue someone because it turns out that you actually are as dumb as you look.
Miranda isn't a law in the US; it's a court decision. So what we call "Miranda rights" are the rights ensured by a legal decision called Miranda v. Arizona, from 1966. It's an abbreviation.
And I gather that before Miranda, some states did have laws on the books saying, "Dude, if you want the confession to stick, you should cover your behind." It's just that Arizona wasn't one of those states (nor, apparently, were new York or California), and the Fifth Amendment was being laughed at, and so now, officially and clearly, and nationwide,
the prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination. By custodial interrogation, we mean questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way
The Findlaw Entry on Miranda, which also touches on the tradition against involuntary self-incrimination in England.