This is a purely educational website. Nothing here is legal advice or creates or implies an attorney-client relationship. If you have a specific legal issue, PLEASE talk to a lawyer who practices where you live—laws vary from place to place, and how they're applied varies from courthouse to courthouse. Your local county bar association can probably refer someone.
By using this site, you agree that you are awesome. Use of this site also constitutes acceptance of its
Terms of Service and Privacy Policies, which are known to medical science as a cure for insomnia.
It's best to keep all discussions in the comments. But if you really need to reach Nathan privately, go ahead and email him at n.e.burney@gmail.com. He won't mind.
THE ILLUSTRATED GUIDE TO LAW and the PEEKING JUSTICE logo are pretty damn cool trademarks and should probably be registered one of these days.
© Nathaniel Burney. All rights reserved, though they really open up once you get to know them.
Writing that update sure was an emerency
I think this falls under the emerency exception to the spelling rule.
Gah!
Oops.
Fixed.
Dammit.
Wait, wouldn’t a reasonable person assume that if a policeman is holding their arm in a painful spot and aggressively asking about a bomb (that they clearly think you have a connection to) that you were being compelled to answer? Making it an involuntary confession anyway?
After the emergency was over, ☆ continued questioning him without reading him his rights, right? So that testimony and all evidence leading from it is in jeopardy? The feds were well along in their own investigation so it probably doesn’t matter in this case, but if the circumstances were different he could have blown the whole case?
I know that hold from Aikido. If done right it doesn’t hurt at all if you don’t move.