After an arrest has been made, and an alledged statement has been made by the defendant WITHOUT having been given the miranda rights, are the alledged statements legal to be used at trial, or are they illegally obtained and useless?
2007-02-07 08:51:01 · 6 answers · asked by Janelle C 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
they are not legal because the victim must be reminded their rights. If the victim was read their rights they normally would have to sign something at the station that they were aware of the rights/miranda given to them. Thus meaning: no signed document that was understood means any information said is dismissed in court.
2007-02-07 08:58:24 · answer #1 · answered by Jay 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Miranda rights are needed when there is Custody + Interrogation. Normally, after a person is arrested he is read his Miranda rights and any statement made after that would be admissible in court. However, if a defendant just started confessing to a bunch of crimes without being asked about them, eventhough he is arrested, the statements could possibly be used against him.
2007-02-07 17:04:37 · answer #2 · answered by joshjones007 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It depends. For example, if the cop was about to read miranda rights to a suspect but the suspect blurted out, "I did it, I killed him", then the statement would still be admissible even though the suspect was not mirandized.
Miranda rights only protect the defendant in certain circumstances. There are specific rules which surround whether or not the statement is admissible or not.
2007-02-07 17:24:26 · answer #3 · answered by Peter 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
That would be something that would have to be proved, I am sure that many cops would not take any chances on screwing up a case without giving someone their Miranda Warning. And sometimes, when they do give you your warning, many people still talk when questioned. Cops have many little tricks up their sleeve, because they need closure with a case. Once given your rights, and you refuse to remain silent, then its on you and whatever you say, or sign, will be used against you. Its a cat and mouse game, and they know how to do very well, and so do many lawyers.??
2007-02-07 17:01:28 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
If Miranda rights were not read then the accused needs to have his/her lawyer move to keep them out of evidence.
2007-02-07 16:58:20 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This type of statement can still be used for impeachment at
trial, and if it can be independently validated, then its fair game for any use at all.
2007-02-07 17:15:56 · answer #6 · answered by Jeffrey V 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋