Mediaboss Marketing

Pleading the fifth is one of our constitutional rights, and it's all thanks to a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that started in Phoenix, Arizona.

PHOENIX "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law."

It's a phrase we're all familiar with, and it's part of what's called, the Miranda warning. Nowadays, police officers are required to read it to a suspect when they make an arrest.

The warning is made up of five statements that lay out the rights and protections one has under the constitution.

But police officers weren't always required to read someone their Fifth Amendment rights. That practice came about because of the 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case, Miranda v. Arizona. And that case was decided on today's date, Jun. 13.

Confession without rights

In 1963, Phoenix resident Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnapping and sexually assaulting an 18-year-old girl.

While in police custody, officers obtained a written confession from Miranda... But something wasn't right.

During the trial, Miranda and his lawyer protested that he didn't know he could have an attorney present at his interrogation, or that he could choose to say nothing at all.

And it was true. Phoenix police officers admitted that, during the interrogation, they hadn't directly informed Miranda of those rights.

Despite the defense's objections to using the confession as evidence, Miranda was found guilty of the crimes (mostly because of the confession) and sentenced to 20-30 years in prison.

Miranda's conviction was upheld by the Arizona Supreme Court, so in 1965 he submitted a plea for review to the U.S. Supreme Court. The American Civil Liberties Union stepped in to argue his case.

Miranda v. Arizona

Does the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination extend to the police interrogation of a suspect?

That was the question at the heart of Miranda's hearing before the Supreme Court. The first day of the case started in February of 1966, and arguments ran all the way through June.

Then on Monday, Jun. 13, 1966, the court delivered its opinion: the person in custody must be clearly informed of their rights.

The court was split with a 5-4 ruling. Dissenting opinions argued that this was too strict of an interpretation of the Fifth Amendment, or that it would get in the way of officers being able to do their jobs.

All the same, the Miranda rights are here to stay.

Now the Miranda warning is such a cultural staple that you can find it in almost every T.V. show, book, or movie with police involved. It's hard to imagine, but we wouldn't have those protections if it weren't for this Arizona case.

What happened to Miranda?

After the Supreme Court invalidated Miranda's conviction due to the improper confession, he was retried by the State of Arizona.

At his second trial, the confession wasn't brought up but Miranda was still found guilty on charges of kidnapping and sexual assault.

On Mar. 1, 1967, Miranda was once again sentenced to 20-30 years in prison.

He was paroled in 1972 and died on Jan. 31, 1976, in a fight at a bar in downtown Phoenix. Miranda was buried in the City of Mesa Cemetery.

Arizona Politics

Get the latest Arizona political news on our 12 News YouTube playlist here.

Follow this link:
You have the right to remain silent, thanks to this 1966 Arizona-based court case - 12news.com KPNX

"Innocent until proven guilty."

That's apparently a hard concept for some around northeast Indiana to understand.

And, yes, this is the opinion page, but here's what's sure to prove an unpopular fact: People accused of crimes have rights, too.

I mean, the always-englightened comment section on social media often seems to be a proponent for lynch mob justice give the reins to them and we'll be hanging people daily in the trees on the courthouse square or just drag them out to the lawn and shoot them in the head because that's justice perhaps pining for authoritarian regimes where the "rule of law" is whatever the dictator or oligarchy in power feels like it should be at any given moment.

Thankfully, we live in America where people have rights to due process. People around here can probably recite the Second Amendment by heart, but I can guarantee most don't know the other Bill of Rights amendments that help protect citizens from the state using the law tyrannically.

In fact, five of the first 10 amendments to the constitution deal with matters of law enforcement and criminal justice.

So, here's a refresher course for you all:

Fourth Amendment: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Fifth Amendment: "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

Sixth Amendment: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

Seventh Amendment: "In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."

Eighth Amendment: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

These are reasons why police can't just arrest someone because they feel like it or because someone says they should.

These are the reasons why, if arrested, a person must have a bond set (except in a few narrow situations) and, if they have the means to post it, can gain pre-trial release regardless of the charges levied against them.

These are the reasons why there are particular ways to collect evidence and particular ways to present evidence in court, because there also exist methods for attorneys to impeach evidence that has been improperly collected in defense of the accused.

These are the reasons why we don't just drag people straight out onto the courthouse lawn and hang, shoot or beat them to death like the justice system in "The Handmaid's Tale."

These are the reasons why no one is guilty of anything until judged in a court of law beyond a reasonable doubt that they committed the offense, and even then, judges and juries can still get it wrong as proved after the fact.

As a member of the general public, these constitutional rights can seem inconvenient.

They make the process of prosecuting alleged criminals slow, methodical, complicated, difficult. Much harder than just summarily throwing someone you think did something bad into a jail cell and leaving them there to rot.

But, it's a much different story when you're sitting at the defense table.

They protect you from the howling of mobs and they protect you from arbitrary and capricious judgment from those empowered to enforce the law and pass sentence. They ensure that you get a fair shake and, even if you are convicted, set limits on the type of punishment you may receive to make sure that it is reasonably commensurate to the offense committed.

I can't tell you how many times I've seen people complaining and clamoring that so-and-so should be put to death or they should be doing way more time in prison for whatever crime they committed.

It's shocking, however, that you never hear those families take the stand at sentencing hearings and shout with the same conviction when it's their family member about to be struck by the hammer of justice.

There are places in the world where the criminal justice system is swift and merciless, where the rule of law is weak or functionally nonexistant, where police and courts are actually corrupt, and where people, innocent or not, suffer unjust punishment because there is nothing to protect them.

Thankfully, America is not one of those places, because the law has been designed not just to give justice to victims and the public, but to the accused too.

Read the original:
The accused have rights, too | Columnists - KPCnews.com

Item 1.01 Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement.On June 3, 2022, Brigham Resources, LLC ("Brigham Resources"), a wholly-ownedsubsidiary of the registrant, as borrower, entered into the Fifth Amendment (the"Fifth Amendment") to the Credit Agreement among Brigham Resources, thefinancial institutions party thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., asadministrative agent (the "Credit Agreement"). The Fifth Amendment, among otherthings, (1) evidenced an increase of the borrowing base and elected commitmentsunder the Credit Agreement from $230.0 million to $290.0 million, respectively,(2) effected a transition of the benchmark interest rate from the Londoninterbank offered rate ("LIBOR") to the secured overnight financing rate("SOFR") as administered by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, by replacingreserve-adjusted LIBOR with term SOFR for one, three or six month interestperiods, plus a fixed credit spread adjustment of 0.10% irrespective of electedtenor (subject to a floor of 0.00%), and (3) grandfathered all outstanding LIBORborrowings at original LIBOR benchmark pricing through expiry of the applicableinterest periods therefor.

The foregoing description of the Fifth Amendment is a summary only and isqualified in its entirety by reference to the Fifth Amendment, a copy of whichis attached as Exhibit 10.1 to this Current Report on Form 8-K and isincorporated herein by reference.

Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits.

(d) Exhibits.

of June 3, 2022, by and among

financial institutions party thereto,

agent

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edgar Online, source Glimpses

The rest is here:
BRIGHAM MINERALS, INC. : Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement, Creation of a Direct Financial Obligation or an Obligation under an Off-Balance...

Item 1.01 Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement.

On June 7, 2022, Barnes & Noble Education, Inc. (the "Company") entered into(i) a Term Loan Credit Agreement (the "Term Loan Credit Agreement"), among theCompany, as borrower, certain subsidiaries of the Company party thereto asguarantors ("the Guarantors"), TopLids LendCo, LLC and Vital Fundco, LLC, aslenders, and TopLids LendCo, LLC, as administrative agent and collateral agentfor the lenders, and (ii) a Fifth Amendment to Credit Agreement (the "ABLAmendment") to the Credit Agreement, dated as of August 3, 2015 (as amendedprior to the ABL Amendment, the "ABL Credit Agreement"), among the Company, asthe lead borrower, the other borrowers party thereto, the lenders party theretoand Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent and collateral agent for thelenders (in such capacities, the "ABL Agent").

The Term Loan Credit Agreement provides for the incurrence by the Company ofterm loans in an amount equal to $30 million (the "Term Loan Facility" and, theloans thereunder, the "Term Loans"). The proceeds of the Term Loans are beingused to finance working capital, and to pay fees and expenses related to theTerm Loan Facility. The Term Loans accrue interest at a rate equal to 11.25% andmature on June 7, 2024. The Company has the right, through December 31, 2022, topay all or a portion of the interest on the Term Loans in kind. The Term Loansdo not amortize prior to maturity. Solely to the extent that any Term Loansremain outstanding on June 7, 2023, the Company must pay a fee of 1.5% of theoutstanding principal amount of the Term Loans on such date.

The Term Loans are required to be repaid (i) after repayment of the FILO trancheunder the ABL Credit Agreement, with up to 100% of the proceeds of the sale of anon-core business line of the Company generating net proceeds in excess of$1,000,000, other than ordinary course dispositions and (ii) in full inconnection with a debt or equity financing transaction generating net proceedsin excess of an amount sufficient to repay the FILO tranche under the ABL CreditAgreement.

The Term Loan Credit Agreement does not contain a financial covenant, butotherwise contains representations and warranties, covenants and events ofdefault that are substantially the same as those in the ABL Credit Agreement,including restrictions on the ability of the Company and its subsidiaries toincur additional debt, incur or permit liens on assets, make investments andacquisitions, consolidate or merge with any other company, engage in asset salesand make dividends and distributions. The Term Loan Facility is secured bysecond-priority liens on all assets securing the obligations under the ABLCredit Agreement, which is all of the assets of the Company and the Guarantors,subject to customary exclusions and limitations set forth in the Term LoanCredit Agreement and the other loan documents executed in connection therewith.

The ABL Amendment amends the ABL Credit Agreement to permit the Company to incurthe Term Loan Facility. The ABL Amendment also provides that, upon repayment ofthe Term Loan Credit Agreement (and, if applicable, any replacement creditfacility thereof), the Company and its subsidiaries may incur second liensecured debt in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $75,000,000.

The foregoing description is qualified in its entirety by reference to the TermLoan Credit Agreement or the ABL Amendment, as applicable, copies of which areattached as Exhibit 10.1 and Exhibit 10.2, respectively, and incorporated byreference in its entirety in this Item 1.01.

Item 2.03 Creation of a Direct Financial Obligation or an Obligation under an

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangement of a Registrant.

The information set forth above under Item 1.01 is incorporated by reference.

Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edgar Online, source Glimpses

Read more:
BARNES & NOBLE EDUCATION, INC. : Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement, Creation of a Direct Financial Obligation or an Obligation under an...

Pro Football Talks Mike Florio believes the newest accusation could void Deshaun Watons contract with the Cleveland Browns.

Mike Florio is a sports writer and personality for Pro Football Talk, and hes also a former lawyer who focused on labor law. Hes pretty astute when it comes to the legal proceedings and when it comes to legal proceedings, he shouldnt be dismissed. So when he starts talking about the legality of a contract between a player, in this case, Deshaun Watson, and his team, the Cleveland Browns; fans should listen.

Watson was hit with his 24th lawsuit recently, this time by a woman not previously known to Watsons attorneys. The firm handling Watson knew of the 23 other women who filed suits, and so did everyone else to some degree. When the Cleveland Browns talked about how they did their due diligence (ha) the 23 women that filed suits were whom they were referring to.

This is a new suit, by a new woman, with horrifying new accusations. Due to the fact that the Browns and Watsons own firm didnt know about the 24th accuser, Florio surmises that the Browns may be able to void Watsons deal should it come to that.

Florio was able to get a copy of Watsons contract back in April, and the contract language seemingly says ok were fine with all of this, but if one more new one pops up.

As Florio explains it;

As explained in early April, after we obtained a full copy of Watsons contract, the contract exempts from the standard default/guarantee void language a suspension imposed by the league solely in connection with matters disclosed to Club in writing pursuant to paragraph 42 and such suspension results in Players unavailability to Club solely for games during the 2022 or 2023 NFL League Years.

In paragraph 42 of the contract, Watson represents and warrants (except as disclosed to club in writing), as of the date hereof, that (i) Player has not been charged with, indicted for, convicted of or pled nolo contende to any felony and/or misdemeanor involving fraud or moral turpitude, (ii) Player has not engaged in conduct which would subject him to a charge, indictment or conviction of any such offense, and (iii) no circumstances exist that would prevent Players continuing availability to the Club for the duration of this Contract.

The written disclosure was not attached to the contract. A source with knowledge of the document told us in April that its a fair assumption that it refers to the 22 pending civil lawsuits.

The 24th lawsuit was never disclosed to the club. Would a 24th edge out the 22 others previously known? Who knows, but straw did eventually break the camels back. So who knows how many more theyre willing to accept.

Its fair to say that if there was a previously undisclosed 24th (alleged) victim, then theres probably more. After all, more than 40 women in the span of 18 months have claimed to have worked on Watson, 24 of them alleging some sort of sexual misconduct transpired, while a 25th, one that Watsons lawyer brought in, believed that Watson was trying to sleep with the massage therapists.

When your own witness torpedoes your defense, thats gotta hurt.

The story is changing every day for Watson and his defense. First, it was that he never did anything wrong, then it was that he only engaged in sex acts with three women who he claims instigated it. Then he said he would never disrespect a woman, then he admitted to making a massage therapist cry, but didnt say why and hid behind the fifth amendment. Then his lawyer said, basically so what to Watson seeking out sexual release from strangers who were massaging him.

Now we have more alleged victims coming forward to tell their stories. Eventually, the Browns are going to have to start answering questions. The sad thing is, even if I still believed Andrew Berry and Kevin Stefanski were decent men, I never thought Jimmy Haslam was. The man threw his own daughters under the bus to justify trading for #(2)4, so I dont see Haslam voiding the deal.

For those curious, this also re-opens Watson to being indicted for criminal charges if the most recent accuser decides to pursue that direction.

Factor in that the Texans demanded Watson have his dinner dates sign non-disclosure agreements, as well as his paying a Houston spay owner $5 grand, and you really start to see the picture forming.

Occams Razor says that if you hear hoof beats in Montana, think horse; not zebra. That should be attributed here, as there seems to be a stampede heading Watsons way and the Browns should do what they do best, cover their own rears.

The rest is here:
The 24th Deshaun Watson accuser could give Cleveland Browns the right to void his contract - Factory of Sadness