on this day … 10/23

Hostage crisis in Moscow theater
On October 23, 2002, about 50 Chechen rebels storm a Moscow theater, taking up to 700 people hostage during a sold-out performance of a popular musical. The second act of the musical “Nord Ost” was just beginning at the Moscow Ball-Bearing Plant’s Palace of Culture when an armed man walked onstage… read more »
British fleet suffers defeat at Fort Mifflin, Pennsylvania »
U.S. Embassy in Beirut hit by massive car bomb »
Battle of Westport, Missouri »
Hungarian protest turns violent »
An abortion-performing doctor is murdered »
Gas leak kills 23 at plastics factory »
Rival governments in bleeding Kansas »
Beirut barracks blown up »
Brutus commits suicide »
Michael Crichton is born »
Chicago has its first #1 hit with “If You Leave Me Now” »
American fur traders turn over Astoria, Oregon, to the British »
President Benjamin Harrison extends borders of Nebraska »
1st Cavalry Division launches Operation Silver Bayonet »
U.S. negotiators ask for further talks in Paris »
Soviets switch commanders in drive to halt Germans »

Know Your Rights …

reblogged – Gotta wonder,  what has changed 8 years later

What does placing your signature on the Miranda Waiver Really Mean?

by jeanfandrews

Deaf suspects are asked routinely to sign the Miranda Warning Waiver affirming they waive their rights. What does this mean? For the police and detective this means that the deaf person understands the six statements of the Miranda and read it with comprehension. When they sign their name on the waiver, this means they waiver their rights to remain silent, seek an attorney before questioning and so on. However, the deaf person may sign their name and have a different view. A deaf defendant who may read at the third grade or below may not be able to read the Miranda. They may put their signature on the document simply to appear cooperative. How can the detective determine if the deaf person understands the Miranda Warning? One way is to have a sign language interpreter present. This rarely happens. Typically, police and detectives relay on written communication and lipreading which are rarely effective for deaf defendants whose primary language is American Sign Language (ASL). Two viewpoints–one from the detective or police and one from the deaf defendants. The police and detectives run the risk of having their interrogation and confessions of the defendant thrown out of court or suppressed if they fail to provide for a sign language interpreter. This is not only Federal law but is found in many state statutes as well. What is the answer? More education for detectives and police about the difficulties deaf adults have in comprehending the Miranda.