Miranda Vs Arizona Injustice

Our society is plagued with a form of injustice that has affected and targeted teenagers in our town.Teenagers ranging from the ages of 13-15 are not being told their Miranda rights as well as their 5th amendment rights, which are violated. As the leader and head of this town, it is essential that our youth feel safe and are protected in our town. However, in doing so we need to have and pass legislations that will help the youth of our town. There is a piece of legislation that saying”it would prohibit the police from interrogating any child under the age of 16 without the child first having the opportunity to confer with a parent or guardian and without obtaining a waiver rights from both the child and the parent.” This law is a very important

In the case of Miranda vs. Arizona (1966), Miranda was arrested at his home and taken into custody for questioning. The interrogation lasted for two hours and the complaining witness identified Miranda as the suspect. As a result, Miranda signed a written confession. At trial when the information was presented to the jury, they found Miranda guilty of kidnapping and rape and was charged 20-30 years of imprisonment on each count. Miranda appealed the case to the Supreme Court of Arizona which ruled that his constitutional rights were not violated by obtaining his confession. With that being said, Miranda appealed the decision of Arizona and brought the case up to the highest and the court of the last resort. The Supreme Court ruled that Miranda’s rights were violated based on the fact that Miranda was not granted counsel. However, not only was Miranda not presented with counsel, but he was not told of his rights. He was taken from his home and was interrogated by authorities at the police station. Chief Justice Earl Warren of the Supreme Court ruled that the prosecution could

North Carolina (2011). A boy from North Carolina identified as J.D.B is a special educated student who was thirteen at the time. In 2005 authorities came to his school to ask questions regarding a series of burglaries in the neighborhood. The authorities found a digital camera that was reported stolen in the boy’s belongings. As a result, the officers furthered their investigation by taking the boy into a secluded room, where they interrogated him in the midst of school officials. However, the boy’s parents were not contacted, and he was not told of his rights, although the Miranda case decision authorizes authorities to tell alleged suspects of their rights, such as the right to remain silent or to have access to a lawyer. Although the young boy confessed to the crime, when he was given a lawyer, they sought to suppress the confession because J.D.B wasn’t aware of his