tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2252129938551938631.post5848911292870194866..comments2024-03-25T22:28:29.238-04:00Comments on Tony Isabella's Bloggy Thing: ARROW 2Tony Isabellahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07356415470545816484noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2252129938551938631.post-53770733236493304422012-10-19T05:38:47.492-04:002012-10-19T05:38:47.492-04:00Back when I was practicing law, the courts were di...Back when I was practicing law, the courts were divided on whether Mr. Somers's confession would be admissible in court. Some courts held that because the confession was not obtained by any state action but was given to them by an outside source, the so-called "Silver Platter" Doctrine applied. That made the confession admissible.<br /><br />Other courts have held that the 5th Amendment was written to counter the once wide-spread use of torture to extract confessions. These courts noted that confessions induced by torture were generally unreliable, because the interogees would say anything and confess to anything to end the torture. They would say what the Grand Inquisitor wanted to hear, irrespective of whether it was true. So these courts held that any forced confession -- whether it be forced by the state or by a private citizen -- was inadmissible.<br /><br />In the years since the Warren Court and the MIRANDA/EPSOSITO cases ruled that coerced confessions had to be suppressed, courts have become more reluctant to suppress evidence. So the trend has been toward allowing confessions that were not induced by any state action to be admissible.<br /><br />As we want happy endings, we'll assume Starling City is in a jurisdiction that would allow Somers's coerced confession, because there was no state action.<br /><br />I also assume that Ms. Nocenti's name was a nod to Ann Nocenti; especially as she is the current writer of GREEN ARROW in the New 52.Bob Ingersollhttp://www.facebook.com/lawgiverbobnoreply@blogger.com