Comments:US Supreme Court relaxes strict interpretation of self incrimination ruling
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Comments on this page were originally made using the LiquidThreads extension, which is no longer supported. It has since been exported to wikitext, but the export process was not perfect so comments may appear slightly oddly.
The only correct answer
[edit]He should have answered "mu".
(Yes, I know that "no" would be correct if he hadn't committed the crime.) Aaron Rotenberg (talk) 02:20, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Comments from feedback form - "Although the guy was probably ..."
[edit]Although the guy was probably guilty, it does seem a little childish. I know that lawyers generally inhibit the ability of police to do their jobs, but I think that you should be offered an attorney that you HAVE to turn down before questioning. 153.26.178.61 (talk) 06:58, 5 June 2010 (UTC)