ipl-logo

Argument Against Miranda Rights

471 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Miranda rights and how it's changed the criminal law system essays

I believe Miranda Rights are a beneficial tool for all American citizens; therefore, arresting officers should continue to read the Miranda Rights to those that they arrest. Every person has heard the phrase "Miranda Rights", whether or not that be when taking a law class, or perhaps across particular experience with their use. What do these two words really truly mean? Where did they come from and how do they influence to an individual's everyday life?
America is a great place with all its laws to secure people and anyone that wants to come into the country. Some people believe that the laws can be confusing, harsh, or don't work at all. On occasion sometimes the police disobey certain rights and that's when things turn from bad to worse. The Miranda Rights are perfect as written in print because they protect the suspect, it has already been …show more content…

The constitution also has a set of amendments that are well known called the bill of rights, in view that they mostly deal with rights of the “people” and all citizens of the United States. We as citizens should be aware of our rights in the Constitution. As the ‘’people’’ of America should realize that any of our rights in the Constitution is subjected to frequently understanding by our courts, especially by the United States Supreme Court.
The Miranda Rights should and meant to be told to those held in custody, detained. A police officer must be cautious in the order in which they hesitate or question the suspect and read the suspects rights. No matter if the prosecutor is guilty or not we should be told our constitutional rights.
‘’You have the right to remain silent. ... You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for

Show More
Related
734 Words | 3 Pages

It was later noticed upon an appeal to the state Supreme Court that the officer who arrested Miranda, did not state his basic rights and was affirmed. (legaldictionary.net, Procedural History). This also means that Miranda couldn’t be set free because he did not ask to have an to be attorney present. But, Miranda and other defendants with similar cases petitioned to the United States Supreme Court to reevaluate the case and to have another ruling. The overall ruling of the final case to have it mandatory to read these specific rights was passed and are vital to the process of being arrested and

Read More
1392 Words | 6 Pages

To ensure that your rights are protected under the United States Constitution, the Miranda warning must be read to you upon an arrest. Danny Escobedo, a 22-year-old murder suspect, was arrested and taken to police headquarters for interrogation in connection with a shooting of his brother-in-law, about 11 days prior. He had been arrested shortly after the shooting, but was released after making no statement and had his lawyer obtain a writ of habeas corpus from the state court. In police custody, Escobedo confessed to firing the shot that killed the victim. He was not advised of his right to remain silent, violating his Fifth Amendment, and police interrogated Escobedo for several hours, while repeatedly denying his request to consult with

Read More
883 Words | 4 Pages

The creation of the United States and the colonies that came before, brought about many legal traditions and precedents. Among these legal traditions and precedents, is an essential precedent present in all interrogation related proceedings and court ones—the Miranda warning. When an individual is detained, they may be subjected to an interrogation by designated officials. During an interrogation certain rights are guaranteed to an individual through the provision of the Bill of Rights to prevent self-incrimination and the historical precedent established before it. However, in certain situations, these rights were not always guaranteed as they should’ve been.

Read More
1023 Words | 5 Pages

Arizona case argued whether or not “the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination extend to the police interrogation of a suspect” (Oyez). Miranda, after two hours of interrogation, gave a written confession to the police saying that he was guilty. However, the police did confess that they had never informed Miranda of his Fifth Amendment rights, which included a right to an attorney, and because of this, the argument was made that the police had violated Miranda's Fifth Amendment rights. Warren, who was a part of the majority, in this case, decided in favor of Miranda, and that “the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination is available in all settings. Therefore, prosecution may not use statements arising from a custodial interrogation of a suspect unless certain procedural safeguards were in place” (Oyez).

Read More
814 Words | 4 Pages

The supreme court overturned the ruling saying that a defendant, “must be warned prior to any questioning that he has the right to remain silent, that anything he says can be used against him in a court of law, that he has the right to the presence of an attorney, and that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any questioning if he so desires ( Miranda v. Arizona SCOTUS 1).” The supreme court ruled this in order to protect suspects from being pressured by law enforcement to incriminate

Read More
792 Words | 4 Pages

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), holds an important position in the United States law history of suspects, giving some the right to preserve their innocence and others the chance to remain silent even if they are guilty. To be a free, just nation, there lies many important responsibilities upon the lawmakers of the nation, which leads them to consider every single fact relating an individual’s rights. I personally give my stance in the favour of this decision. There are many important cases related to fundamental rights of fairness of the suspects in the United States history such as “Mapp v. Ohio, 1961, Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963 and Escobedo v. Illinois, 1964, but Miranda v. Arizona was granted the top position by U.S. government. Ernesto Miranda was arrested in 1963, being charged of kidnapping and rape.

Read More
194 Words | 1 Pages

After the Miranda verdict, the police sanctions were required to illuminate suspects of their rights under the decision. This was later deemed as Miranda Warnings. Police stations have pre-printed Miranda waiver cards in which a suspect must sign and date. These precautions have been placed if a trial is to occur. Miranda Right Warnings are implemented not only to protect the citizen but to secure police officers as well.

Read More
376 Words | 2 Pages

When people are suspects under the law, they are entitled to their Miranda rights. A persons Miranda rights entitle them to remain silent, have an attorney present, have an attorney appointed to them if they cannot afford one, and that person is questioned if they understand those rights. It seems that a whopping 80% of suspects waive their Miranda rights. There are no exact reasons, only speculations as to why people waive that right. One that I will focus on is “Why do I need an attorney, if I did not do anything wrong?”

Read More
169 Words | 1 Pages

The whole point of the Fourth Amendment is not to completely stop the police, because the amendment can be waived if an officer has a warrant, or a person’s consent. The Fourth Amendment states that generally a search or seizure is illegal unless there is a warrant, or special circumstances. Technically stating that a citizen is protected by the Fourth Amendment, until a government employee gets a warrant, and then they can invade a citizen’s privacy. Also people state that the FISA Court’s warrants are constitutional, but the NSA’s surveillance is unconstitutional. Even though people do not like the NSA’s surveillance, the NSA is legal because the FISA Court that the people did not mind makes it legal.

Read More
534 Words | 3 Pages

“Strawberry Spring” fulfills all of the three reasons of why we crave horror. One of the three reasons is “to show that we are not afraid” of facing our fears (King, “Why We Crave” 1). Watching a horror film or reading one of Stephen King’s terrifying books can give us an adrenaline rush or maybe even chills. For example, near the beginning of the narrator’s encounter, “a junior named John Dancey...began screaming into the fog” when he found a “dead girl lying in a shadowy corner” of a parking lot (King, “Strawberry Spring” 2). After all, finding out about Gale Cerman’s death, while having a rather horrifying image of her dead body, is quite shocking.

Read More
890 Words | 4 Pages

Even though what Miranda did was a violent and horrible action. His trial still brought up controversy in the court system which later turned into a Miranda warning card that police stations around the country use to this

Read More
1055 Words | 5 Pages

Arizon was that the Court needed to decide when and how the suspects could have constitutional rights. There were so many problems in regard to this issue, for example, should the suspects keep silence all the time or just during the trial? In order to clarify these questions, the the Supreme Court released the decision in Miranda v. Arizona. The Miranda warnings are established as followings: Prior to any questioning, the person must be warned that he has a right to remain silent, that any statement he does make may be used against him, and that he has a right to the presence of an attorney, either retained or appointed (Sidlow & Henschen,

Read More
501 Words | 3 Pages

The book describes the Miranda Rights, which are the legal rights that a person under arrest must be informed before they are interrogated by police. If the arresting officer doesn’t inform an arrested person of his Miranda Rights, that person may walk free from any chargers. The book also talks about double jeopardy, double jeopardy is the right that prohibits a person from been tried twice for the same crime. In other words if a person is found innocent and sometime later new evidence surface that can incriminate him with the crime that he is “innocent” he cannot be charged for that same crime. The book also mentions self-incrimination, which is the right that no citizen will have to be a witness against himself.

Read More
948 Words | 4 Pages

Signifying, if an officer cannot prove important situations the arrest of someone may be canceled. As a result of the Fourth Amendment, U.S citizens are protected from unfair or unwanted

Read More
480 Words | 2 Pages

Also a person being interrogated might give a false confession if it were not for the ability to remain silent (Taylor, 2015). The criminal justice system is in the United Stated of America is not without flaws, but it has certain protections built in to safeguard the individual from government oppression. The fifth amendment is one of them, it affords a person protection from being forced to give evidence against themselves. Should this right be violated there are remedies in place whereby any evidence gain from this violation can not be used against the person. There is also the possibility of a civil suit for a violation of one's fifth amendment rights by the government or its

Read More

More about Argument Against Miranda Rights

Related Topics

Open Document