Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99
And that is what I have a massive problem with.
In what other circumstance in any facet of life in Canada, can you be refused expert advice, and where could it possibly be more important to an individual than in this situation?
That should be a right that everyone receives, and is the crux of thsi whole argument. Too many things can go wrong when you dont have the ability to ask experts in any field that matters.
A cop says, "OK you can call your attorney"...you call and find out that he is unavailable for 3 days as he out in BC with his girlfriend and is not or can not be contacted. So now the cop says, "too bad I am gonna grill you for 6 hours straight and coerce you to tell me things", if the accused doesnt know he has the right not to say anything as advised by an attorney, it opens up the possibility of things being done innappropriately. Allowing a lawyer in removes ALL that stuff. Simple.
|
Thats the thing, he DOESN'T have the
right to not say anything until an attorney is present. Of course as a human being, he has the ability to choose not to talk. Its not like they strap him to a torture machine or pull out the car battery and jumper cables.
So you would rather the justice system be stalled for 3+ days because the lawyer you wanted was out of town, and you didn't want the lawyer that was standing across the hall or in his office down the street? You would rather give people driving under the influence the ability to refuse a Breathalyzer until their lawyer got there, and they were sober?
What if you lived in a remote area of the NWT, and every time a suspect needed to be interviewed you needed to wait 2-3 days for a lawyer to get there? you want those people held in jail, until someone is able to come, denying them the right to have justice dispensed quickly?
I am not saying that there wouldn't be justifiable advantages to having that right, I am just pointing out that it isn't as black and white as you think it is.