Power Line News

Full story here in the Cincinnati Enquirer:
http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071021/NEWS01/710210393/1077/COL02

* * * *

In 1992, Cincinnati homicide detectives David Feldhaus and Harry Frisby faced William Garner, a man who broke into an English Woods apartment, stole electronic equipment, then set the home on fire to cover his tracks.

Five children died in the fire.

Only a 13-year-old escaped, dropping from a second-story window as a wall of fire flared across his bedroom doorway.

The detectives read Garner, 19, of Avondale, his Miranda rights before they questioned him.

FELDHAUS: Before we get goin’ Mr. Garner, I wanna show you a piece of paper here I read you that’s your notification of rights. Is that correct?

GARNER: Yes sir.

FELDHAUS: And that’s your signature?

GARNER: Yes sir.

FELHAUS: Is there any question you want to ask me about that?

GARNER: No sir.

Garner confessed, was convicted on five charges of aggravated murder and sentenced to death.

Now, 15 years later, the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals has granted Garner’s request for further judicial consideration of his conviction.

The court determined Garner didn’t understand his Miranda rights and reversed the conviction. The 2-1 decision released last month found Garner was poorly educated and borderline mentally retarded.

* * * *

Krumpelbeck detailed what happened early the morning of Jan. 26, 1992, as if it were a recent case instead of one with 15 years of history.

Hours before the fire, Garner slipped into University Hospital, looking for an easy mark. There, he found Jackson and Addie Mack, who had fallen and hurt her wrist.

Garner snatched up Mack’s purse when she wasn’t looking, stealing money and her apartment keys.

He took a taxi to the English Woods apartment, telling the driver to wait while he retrieved his belongings. He carted out electronic equipment, at one point waking up one of the children.

Garner spun a tale about her mother sending him to check everyone and sent her back to bed with a glass of water.

Before leaving, Garner set three fires in the apartment.

Then, he grabbed the phone and smoke detectors and left, Krumpelbeck said.

* * * *

Judge Karen Nelson Moore, joined by Judge Boyce L. Martin, wrote that Garner didn’t understand his right to remain silent, despite twice saying he did.

Yet he understood snatching up the phone and smoke detectors after setting the fires in that apartment.

Guilty!  Death!

Not my fault he is stupid. They overturn this but not Craig? Lol. The problem is not whether they overturned it or not. But how easily things like this happen.

And if the guy is retarded why is that not used as a defense? And borderline retarded doesn’t make him. There is a line drawn. So if he was he would of used it as a defense. If not retarded then he admitted to it.

Just cause people do really really mean and horrible stuff doesn’t make them crazy or retarded. They are just truly evil. This just gives me another reason to support the death penalty.

I guess the “Bell Curve” guy was right. Blacks are inherently incapable of understanding the 45-words of Miranda and should all be set free.

Now, he DID understand wrong. He knew it was wrong to set the fire. He new it was wrong to burglarize. He new it was wrong to do a zillion other things to hide his crimes. BUT… when it came time to understand his RIGHTS, well, he was just too stupid, according to the two judges. MORON’S RIGHTS!!! Kill, maim, arson, murder, whatever you want to do. You are too stupid to be held accountable.

BigTex - 24 October 2007 01:23 AM

I guess the “Bell Curve” guy was right. Blacks are inherently incapable of understanding the 45-words of Miranda and should all be set free.

Now, he DID understand wrong. He knew it was wrong to set the fire. He new it was wrong to burglarize. He new it was wrong to do a zillion other things to hide his crimes. BUT… when it came time to understand his RIGHTS, well, he was just too stupid, according to the two judges. MORON’S RIGHTS!!! Kill, maim, arson, murder, whatever you want to do. You are too stupid to be held accountable.

Isn’t that the first thing that criminals and illegal aliens (oh yeah, redundant) holler when grabbed by the cops:  “I got rights!”?

kard - 21 October 2007 11:04 PM

Judge Karen Nelson Moore, joined by Judge Boyce L. Martin, wrote that Garner didn’t understand his right to remain silent, despite twice saying he did.

A foolish decision, as explained in the dissent:

“To invalidate a waiver of Miranda rights because a person of limited IQ cannot give satisfactory definitions of words like “right” is to make it practically impossible for police to rely on objectively reasonable agreements on the part of such persons to talk with police. Nothing in the policies underlying Miranda mandates such an unreasonable obstacle to desirable police procedures.

I am therefore compelled to disagree with the conclusion of the majority opinion in this case that the defendant did not knowingly and intelligently waive his Miranda rights.”

This why i don’t trust the judicial system.If you are in the right state and you ge the right judge you can ge away with murder.The way this was decided it makes every confession conviction worthless.These people deserve a little jail time for Judicial ignorance.

I guess the “Bell Curve” guy was right. Blacks are inherently incapable of understanding the 45-words of Miranda and should all be set free.

Even for you, that is impressively stupid and hateful.

vladimir estragon - 07 December 2007 02:02 PM

I guess the “Bell Curve” guy was right. Blacks are inherently incapable of understanding the 45-words of Miranda and should all be set free.

Even for you, that is impressively stupid and hateful.

Irony:  look it up.

So let me get this straight…

All I have to do is claim I don’t understand the Miranda Rights when they are read to me, and I can walk-away, no matter what I just did? That seems to be about the size of it. Apparently Garner was bright-enough to prey upon an injured woman in a hospital, make his way to her apartment, which he had excellent reason to believe to be empty, come-up with an on-the-spot cover-story for one of the kids, all of which he clearly knew was wrong. Yet he supposedly wasn’t bright or sophisticated enough to realized that confessing to the cops was not just “between him and them”?

I think this is a clear case of border-line mental retardation and intellectual impairment, specifically of the judges writing this absurdly ridiculous opinion!

All we have to go on is this:

Before we get goin’ Mr. Garner, I wanna show you a piece of paper here I read you that’s your notification of rights. Is that correct?

Did he actually read him his rights? It’s not clear. Is he just asking the suspect to agree that he was given his rights even though he wasn’t?

Irony:  look it up.

Tex has made it pretty clear he’s not being “ironic.”

vladimir estragon - 10 December 2007 02:49 PM

Irony:  look it up.

Tex has made it pretty clear he’s not being “ironic.”

Exactly wrong.  Reread what he wrote.

You’ve made it pretty clear you don’t ken irony.

vladimir estragon - 10 December 2007 02:49 PM

All we have to go on is this:

Before we get goin’ Mr. Garner, I wanna show you a piece of paper here I read you that’s your notification of rights. Is that correct?

Did he actually read him his rights? It’s not clear. Is he just asking the suspect to agree that he was given his rights even though he wasn’t?

Of course they did. In the page 11 footnote, they guys wanted to argue with the dissent that - “Under the dissent’s formulation, even a suspect who did not hear his Miranda rights being read somehow
could give a knowing and intelligent waiver, so long as the police had no reason to believe that the suspect did not hear.”

But in this case, every effort was made to insure that the ‘perp’ understood his rights, and again afterward. The officers believed he was responsive, alert and gave every indication of understanding what was said to him. The dissent essentially argues that to impose a ‘system of shrinks’ between the suspect and the officers or detectives, to allow such broad latitude in enforcement based on the ‘perp’s own self-reports, would be to make it impossible for law enforcement to operate in any sort of timely fashion.

What you had was a ‘system’ of shrinks, essentially, who gave the guy his ‘out’ - “Dr. Smalldon concluded that “Mr. Garner’s borderline intelligence, functional (i.e., organic) brain
impairment, abusive and socially deprived background, and long history of impulsivity raise serious questions as to whether he could or did understand the consequences of signing the ‘Waiver of Rights.’” They have a standard waiver of the waiver, as it were, if the ‘perp’ knows enough to pass ‘The Grisso test’. It’s four parts, I believe, which you can read about there. And it takes time for all of this, particularly if every suspect must be run through such a regime before one can be sure that ‘Miranda’ takes and exclusion applies or is waived.

And the way in which this excuse was created caused the dissent, which you can also read there, or above.

I think the obvious solution, if you have an entire ‘system’ now, an actual series of tests meant to gum up the works, is simply to dispense with Miranda, altogether. The ‘exclusionary rule’ must be reigned in.