Terri's friends want to distance themselves after being dragged into investigation

[TxLady2]

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree, Clu. I just can't fathom putting my rights before helping to find Kyron. Why? If you have nothing to fear, why? Furthermore, wouldn't you want to help in any way you could? I believe most of us on here would. I can understand Herding's concern, but the main reason this is becoming "big" news is b/c DeeDee won't talk. I know we have our rights, but once again I'll ask you: Would you really stand on your rights just to make a point and not help this family? I would give anything to be able to do something!

For the record, I never said a word about the other things you referred to, nor would I. I also believe that LE could very well be letting the family know what to say/do. They won't do it, so blame the family. MOO.

OT: I LOVE your avatars!! How do you get the kitties to change all the time?

Pardon me for jumping in, but what if there is nothing she can tell LE that would help find Kyron? People are assuming that because she is a friend of Terri's, and Kaine and Desiree said she wasn't cooperating, that she is an accomplice. That may not be true.

If I were innocent of a crime, and merely tried to be a friend to someone who was distraught, YES, I would assert my constitutional rights and refuse a LDT, or prolonged questioning. If I knew nothing, I would say nothing.
OTOH... if I did know anything at all that would help.. I would cooperate to the fullest. I realize that is what your point is. All I am saying is, this woman has been outed by the two parents, and openly accused in the media of doing things she may not have done. What if she doesn't know anything? She still has rights and one is to protect herself.

On a further note... I wonder how happy LE is with the two parents right now because of releasing their statement about her. This could be something they wanted to keep to themselves until they have more proof. And IF she is innocent, had nothing to do with whatever happened to Kyron, I wouldn't blame her for bringing a civil suit against them for smearing her name!

 

[Adrienne37]

<snip for space>

On a further note... I wonder how happy LE is with the two parents right now because of releasing their statement about her. This could be something they wanted to keep to themselves until they have more proof. And IF she is innocent, had nothing to do with whatever happened to Kyron, I wouldn't blame her for bringing a civil suit against them for smearing her name!

On the other hand, LE could have orchestrated DY/KH's statement regarding this woman. Since none of us here are privy to the who, what, when, where, or how LE is operating, it could go either way. JMHO.

 

[angelmom]

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree, Clu. I just can't fathom putting my rights before helping to find Kyron. Why? If you have nothing to fear, why? Furthermore, wouldn't you want to help in any way you could? I believe most of us on here would. I can understand Herding's concern, but the main reason this is becoming "big" news is b/c DeeDee won't talk. I know we have our rights, but once again I'll ask you: Would you really stand on your rights just to make a point and not help this family? I would give anything to be able to do something!

BBM...I think this is the issue. What if she doesn't know anything about Kyron? What if all she knows is that her friend, whom she might truly believe to be innocent and incapable of hurting Kyron (which may, in fact, be true) has been dragged through the mud, convicted in the media, and threatened by the public. She's taken and failed either 2 or 3 LDTs, and singled out by the investigation.

Now we KNOW for a FACT that innocent people sometimes fail LDTs. We KNOW for a FACT that innocent people are lied to by LE (legally) and sometimes even confess after intense pressure and long interrogations. We KNOW for a FACT that innocent people sometimes go to jail, prison, even death row for crimes they did not commit. Rare? Yes. But if you are a friend of Terri's, watching this all unfold, and you truly believe in your heart that she is being destroyed by innuendo and a crappy alibi, then wouldn't you hesitate to take a LDT? Wouldn't you think twice about talking to the press? Wouldn't you consult a lawyer about talking to LE? And it is pretty much undisputed that any criminal defense lawyer will tell you not to take an LDT and not to talk without a lawyer and to stand on your right to remain silent.

If Terri is truly innocent, or even if DS simply believes Terri is innocent, this must be terrifying. And when we convict people for exercising their rights, then we lose a little bit of the freedom that is so often taken for granted in this country.

 

[Dear Prudence]

I could be completely wrong here, but doesn't your "right" to remain silent only come into effect when you are charged with a crime? Otherwise, do you not have an obligation to cooperate with LE and provide whatever information you may have? I guess you can always invoke your 5th amendment right to not incriminate yourself, but that implies you are guilty of something.

 

[Calliope]

I could be completely wrong here, but doesn't your "right" to remain silent only come into effect when you are charged with a crime? Otherwise, do you not have an obligation to cooperate with LE and provide whatever information you may have? I guess you can always invoke your 5th amendment right to not incriminate yourself, but that implies you are guilty of something.

No. No. And no.

 

[angelmom]

I could be completely wrong here, but doesn't your "right" to remain silent only come into effect when you are charged with a crime? Otherwise, do you not have an obligation to cooperate with LE and provide whatever information you may have? I guess you can always invoke your 5th amendment right to not incriminate yourself, but that implies you are guilty of something.

I'm not a lawyer, but I think LE cannot force you to come in and talk to them unless they arrest you. I don't think they can force you to talk to them either.

http://boingboing.net/2008/07/28/law-prof-and-cop-agr.html

 

[Amster]

Maybe there are texts and phone calls and e-mails that put DDS with Terri that day....or something else that has been discovered involving DDS with Terri that day....LE knows. Kaine and Desiree know. DDS knows. We don't.

Would Kaine and Desiree really do or say something that would hamper the search for their son? I don't believe they would.

 

[Dear Prudence]

No. No. And no.

LOL. Thanks, I thought I may be wrong. Except I do question a person's right to remain silent even if not charged with a crime. For instance, if LE suspects my friend was involved in a crime and that I may have knowledge of her whereabouts at the time of the crime, do I have a right to remain silent and not talk to LE? If I refuse, couldn't they charge me with obstruction or get a subpeona to require me to appear for a deposition or something?

 

[seeking truth]

I'm not a lawyer, but I think LE cannot force you to come in and talk to them unless they arrest you. I don't think they can force you to talk to them either.

http://boingboing.net/2008/07/28/law-prof-and-cop-agr.html

But, isn't it the law (in some states, because this is not federal law, I don't think) that a person can be charged for concealing knowledge of a crime; either by not reporting it OR, once arrested, if they do not share what they know?

Is this a moral issue only? I don't think so, not in many states, anyway, but I am not quite sure.

My opinion.

 

[angelmom]

Ullman v United States
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0350_0422_ZO.html

Too many, even those who should be better advised, view this privilege as a shelter for wrongdoers. They too readily assume that those who invoke it are either guilty of crime or commit perjury in claiming the privilege. [n2] Such a view does scant honor [p427] to the patriots who sponsored the Bill of Rights as a condition to acceptance of the Constitution by the ratifying States. The Founders of the Nation were not naive or disregardful of the interests of justice. The difference between them and those who deem the privilege an obstruction to due inquiry has been appropriately indicated by Chief Judge Magruder:

Our forefathers, when they wrote this provision into the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution, had in mind a lot of history which has been largely forgotten today. See VIII Wigmore on Evidence (3d ed.1940) § 2250 et seq.; Morgan, The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, 34 Minn.L.Rev. 1 (1949). They made a judgment and expressed it in our fundamental law, that it were better for an occasional crime to go unpunished than that the prosecution should be free to build up a criminal case, in whole or in part, with the assistance of enforced disclosures by the accused. The privilege against self-incrimination serves as a protection to the innocent, as well as to the guilty, and we have been admonished that it should be given a liberal application. Hoffman v. United States, . . . 341 U.S. 479, 486. . . . If it be thought that the privilege is outmoded in the conditions of this modern [p428] age, then the thing to do is to take it out of the Constitution, not to whittle it down by the subtle encroachments of judicial opinion.

 

[Dear Prudence]

No. No. And no.

LOL. Thanks, I thought I may be wrong. Except I do question a person's right to remain silent even if not charged with a crime. For instance, if LE suspects my friend was involved in a crime and that I may have knowledge of her whereabouts at the time of the crime, do I have a right to remain silent and not talk to LE? If I refuse, couldn't they charge me with obstruction or get a subpeona to require me to appear for a deposition or something?

Okay, sorry to quote myself but I did some reading. I'm sure most of you are much smarter than me and already know this but just in case there are others like me that are confused about our 'right to silence' as it pertains to witnesses, here's some info.

The Miranda warning refers to the rights given to all of us from the Constitution, whether we're being suspected of a crime or not. LE does not have to read you your rights in order to question you or arrest you, but they are required to read your rights before they question you in custody. It does get very complicated, but for the sake of this thread and my brain, I am oversimplifying it.

So, as a witness you do have the right to remain silent and not talk to or cooperate with the police. You can be subpeonaed to testify though and these witness subpeonas usually include some kind of "use immunity" which holds you immune from prosecution to what you will testify, which nullifies your 5th amendment right against self-incrimination.

Legally, DD's refusal to cooperate with LE can not be looked upon as an implication of guilt or admission of wrong-doing. But, I can understand how many can interpret it that way (myself included.)

ETA: this is just my simplified layperson's interpretation of complicated constitutional laws - it could be way off-base so please correct if needed.

 

[Tori2]

Angel, Tx, and anyone else I'm forgetting: I totally understand your viewpoint and to some degree I agree with it. However, in this case, I do not understand why DD won't talk. If she knows NOTHING - especially if she knows nothing - why can't she just say that? I know all too well how people get railroaded into things, but I still think it's in her best interest to just tell them what she knows - even if it's nada. IMO, she may be guilty of nothing, but this behavior doesn't point to that. I can't tell you how many times I've listened to Marc Klaas and others tell people to get themselves ruled out of a case. I guess this sticks with me. Again, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, b/c I know we each feel strongly about this issue. If it were another case, I might be right on board with you, but not in this case.

 

[cluciano63]

I don't think we have enough information to know for sure that Dede has refused to talk to LE. She may have said she wanted to wait until her father or her lawyer were present and she may be talking to them now, for all we know. I doubt any lawyer would advise her to keep it to herself if she had real information as to the whereabouts and/or life/death of a child. Her lawyer may want to talk to talk to LE first, to make sure his client is protected, if she does have information, but maybe that is all happening.

My point was simply that unless LE says she won't cooperate, I am not assuming it to be a fact.

 

[Tori2]

I don't think we have enough information to know for sure that Dede has refused to talk to LE. She may have said she wanted to wait until her father or her lawyer were present and she may be talking to them now, for all we know. I doubt any lawyer would advise her to keep it to herself if she had real information as to the whereabouts and/or life/death of a child. Her lawyer may want to talk to talk to LE first, to make sure his client is protected, if she does have information, but maybe that is all happening.

My point was simply that unless LE says she won't cooperate, I am not assuming it to be a fact.

Good point...I sure wish they'd share these things!

 

[TrialAddict]

Angel, Tx, and anyone else I'm forgetting: I totally understand your viewpoint and to some degree I agree with it. However, in this case, I do not understand why DD won't talk. If she knows NOTHING - especially if she knows nothing - why can't she just say that? I know all too well how people get railroaded into things, but I still think it's in her best interest to just tell them what she knows - even if it's nada. IMO, she may be guilty of nothing, but this behavior doesn't point to that. I can't tell you how many times I've listened to Marc Klaas and others tell people to get themselves ruled out of a case. I guess this sticks with me. Again, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, b/c I know we each feel strongly about this issue. If it were another case, I might be right on board with you, but not in this case.

I for one learned the hard way. I talked to the police and almost everything I said was twisted to fit what they wanted it too. I was lucky they found out the truth before they had the chance to arrest me. I will never talk to the police for any reason again with out my lawyer being there. Not even if it were something as simple as a jaywalking ticket. I learned that lesson real fast.

 

[debs]

I can't think of the last case I've reviewed where anyone was cleared outright until the case was solved. Not. One. Person.

If there is a statement put into the press which points out that someone believes I'm not cooperating enough to their liking with the police and then the threat that if I don't cooperate to their satisfaction, they will pursue civil actions against me, I'd have my lawyer tied to my hip for however long it takes me and I'd not say a damn thing.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

DDS might not even realize that she knows something at this stage of the game. Unless she was personally involved with whatever happened to or was done with Kyron, DDS might not know anything more than her friend was in serious distress for some reason. In this case, the less said, the better. DDS sought the advice of her father who is in law enforcement, explained the circumstances, remained silent, and hired an attorney. I don't have a problem with that because we have no idea where this saga is leading - better safe than sorry.

 

[xin]

I don't think we have enough information to know for sure that Dede has refused to talk to LE. She may have said she wanted to wait until her father or her lawyer were present and she may be talking to them now, for all we know. I doubt any lawyer would advise her to keep it to herself if she had real information as to the whereabouts and/or life/death of a child. Her lawyer may want to talk to talk to LE first, to make sure his client is protected, if she does have information, but maybe that is all happening.

My point was simply that unless LE says she won't cooperate, I am not assuming it to be a fact.

For one thing, we don't know if she voluntarily let them search her home (I would never ever let cops in without a search warrant); perhaps it was considered uncooperative for her to decline letting LE search her home without a warrant. We need to see those warrants if there are warrants.

 

[Aedrys]

Just catching up on all of this. I've read the debate back and forth on DeDe.

All I want to say is, she isn't talking, Terri isn't talking, and Kyron is still missing. I just wish someone who knew something would talk and help him get found. The fact that these two are waving the "Rights" banner to remain silent just pisses me off to no end.

I know they have rights. I am hearing a lot about all of the rights they have. And I get sick of hearing, in every case, the rights of all people in those cases and how those people have the right to use their rights to protect themselves. Well you know what, they shouldn't have done the crime in first place or gotten involved with someone who did a crime. Then there wouldn't be anything to have to protect.

And you know whose rights I never hear about in any of these cases? The victim, who has no more rights if they're dead, little rights if they are alive. It's all about the OTHER person's rights and honoring them. I get so sick of that. It seems like justice runs so slowly because of being cognizant of rights. But I also know that we'd be uncivilized without them. Deep down, I know we have to have rights, even for criminals. Honestly, I am not against having rights, I am against people shielding themselves and saving their own asses with their rights.

I am also against kids constantly not having any rights. And being hurt and murdered, sometimes not even found because of it. And I get tired of watching the people who did things against them get all the rights in the world, rights the victims were never afforded in the first place.

So yeah, let them have their rights you know where while Kyron is still out in the cold somewhere. I hope they both sleep well at night with all of their rights as their blankets. I don't know if either is guilty or innocent, but I'm not liking what I'm hearing either. They obviously, though, only care about THEIR rights, and don't give a crap about Kyron's.

I do sincerely hope DeDe is cooperating in some way. Letting Kyron lay out there and rot (I believe he's dead, sadly) just nauseates me. And if she is innocent, then refusing to cooperate is not in her best interest. No matter if she's well within her rights, it still makes her look bad and like she's involved.

I know I've never been near a murder investigation myself and I hope to God I never am. Maybe them I'll appreciate rights more. But from where I sit, it's repugnant to me that these two are invoking their rights while Kyron is still out there missing. I would tell the police everything I know and take a poly. I would do anything possible to either clear myself as a suspect or bring this poor child home. I would not sit there, surrounded by my rights, and let this child get lost in all of it. That's just not right to me.

Maybe I'm jaded from all of the cases I've seen and all of the rights invoked. All I know is I just want Kyron found and justice served for him. I am for his rights over everyone else's here. And if people aren't going to talk to just protect themselves, that's sick. After all, and the biggest irony here, is that Kyron couldn't protect himself from what happened to him.

 

[ClueMeIn]

I think I love you Aedrys!