Would a mentally disabled person actually understand the Miranda warning?

Question

The Miranda warning came about because of a landmark Supreme Court case in which a developmentally disabled man named Miranda had been arrested but didn't know what his rights were. That being said, though, do you think that most developmentally disabled people would actually understand the Miranda warning if it was given to them?

Answer 1

The miranda warning has a lot of confusion that goes with it. It has nothing to do with being arrested, detained or otherwise being held on the reasonable belief that a crime was committed and the person did it. The purpose of the warning is to get information about the incident. A policeman can make an arrest, process the individual, and do everything else, without giving the warning. The only thing that can't be used as evidence, is the person admitting guilt or making another statement about the crime. If a person who is mentally disabled to the point of not being able to understand their rights, most likely wouldn't be asked any questions either.
For example. when I worked as a deputy sheriff, I could see a person driving at night without their headlights on, weaving through traffic, stopping too long or not stopping at a stop sign, etc. These are my probable cause for stopping the individual. I approach the vehicle, and the guy has a beer can between his legs, talks with a slur, and doesn't understand what I'm asking him. I get him out of the car, and he can't stand without support. I arrest or apprehend him, cuff him, and take him to the jail house, where a breathalyser test is performed...and comes back as a 1.7. He is put in jail, I didn't ask him any questions, file my report, record the evidence. End of story. Miranda warning not needed, used, or required.

Answer 2

It would depend on how mentally disabled the person is. There are what they call high functioning. These individuals understand most of what is happening around them. None the less, they need supervision.

My sister is mentally handicapped and has a mind of 5 year old. So she would not understand her Miranda rights.

A public defender or a defense attorney could easily prove a handicapped person might not have understood what was happening.

Answer 3

I believe there are some parameters here - if a person could not be said to have understood, then any statements made after the reading would not be admissable, still.

There must be a lot of caselaw on this, and a good defense lawyer should certainly raise it. The actual outcome of the issue would depend on what specific disability the person had and how that affected his ability to understand.

I wonder if someone who was very intoxicated would also have the same argument? Maybe!

Answer 4

I feel it would all depend on the severity of the actual mental handicap. Even a person who isn't mentally disabled has a hard time mentally from day to day depending on how much rest the person has gotten recently. So think about how your mind functions when your sleepy, extremely tired or sick. And I feel you will understand a bit more of what a mentally disabled person might or might not understand.

Answer 5

it would depend on their level of disability. Which would likely have to be determined later, not by the officer giving the warning.

One of the keys of Miranda is whether or not the rights were understood.

Answer 6

I think it would depend on that person's level of disability but for the most part, I would say No. Their rights should be better protected, particularly if they are going to be held accountable for their actions.

Answer 7

Most would. However, I find it hard to believe that any police officer would arrest anyone so mentally disabled that they couldn't understand simple speech. Just because someone is slower to understand some things, doesn't make them incapable of understanding.

Answer 8

That would be determined in court

Answer 9

yes and no, some can, some cannot