Re: [tlug] Collection of Responses, mostly on the Reiser thread(s)

["Birkir A. Barkarson" <birkirb@example.com>]

> However, it is my understanding that Erin is correct: between the time
> that you ask for your lawyer, and the time that the lawyer confers
> with you, anything you say is inadmissible in court. There may well be
> a technicality or loophole or two that makes stuff admissible, but it
> is almost surely not.

I have always understood it to be that as long as the subject was read 
his Miranda Rights, and he can be reasonably assumed to have understood 
them, it becomes the subjects responsibility to use his right to 
silence.  If he speaks, without undue influence, anything he says and 
does can and will be used against him in court. (like it says)
The only difference when the lawyer shows up is that he will make sure 
his client uses his right to silence as not doing so will only serve to 
weaken his case.

Sorry, no links.  But Police Quest and whole lot of TV can teach you a 
few things about due process in the USA  :)

BAB