A Virginia Judge today upheld most of the teen sniper suspect's confession. The legal buzz around here is that the Judge erred. That's our position as well.

Defendants are not allowed to appeal adverse suppression rulings before trial. So the jury will hear John Malvo's statements to police, and if convicted, you can be sure it will be a major ground for appeal.

Essentially, the Judge ruled that 17 year old Malvo had waived both his right to a lawyer and his right to remain silent.

The interview with Detective Boyle and the F.B.I. agent, Brad Garrett, began at 4 p.m. When they told Mr. Malvo they wanted to talk to him, he said, "Do I get to talk to my attorneys?" Detective Boyle said yes. Mr. Malvo then said, "Because the lawyers told me, don't talk until they get here."

Detective Boyle testified that she then told Malvo he "was now facing some new charges in Virginia and they needed to get some information about him."

Defense lawyers argued that the questioning should have stopped when Malvo asked about his lawyers. But Roush disagreed, ruling that Malvo's questions about his lawyer are "at best a request for a clarification of his Miranda rights."

Malvo's lawyers had this to say:

``From our perspective, the actions taken by law enforcement with regard to Mr. Malvo's detention, transport to Virginia and interrogation were deliberate and designed to circumvent his constitutional rights,'' the defense said in a statement.

The Judge's 23 page opinion is available here.