English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

have they still been Mirandized in the eyes of the law?

Example- A normally intelligent person is so inebriated, they just say anything and everything during the arrest and agree to be questioned, and again, say all kinds of nonsense, now which is all completely admissable in court.

2007-12-08 21:28:29 · 9 answers · asked by Snowy Marie 2 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

9 answers

Questioning a person that is inebriated could be a problem. If the person makes statements without being questioned, the statements would normally be admissible even if Miranda rights are NEVER read. If any statements were made while inebriated, the defense would argue the person didn't know what they were talking about and the statements were unreliable.

2007-12-09 00:32:30 · answer #1 · answered by STEVEN F 7 · 1 0

At that stage questions normally aren't asked so the rights aren't read. Reputable cops just arrest and ignore, throw them in the drunk tank and ask questions when they are capable of understanding. If you are able to give permission to be questioned, that is a different story, you're displaying reason capabilities, then your rights should be read. In the eyes of the law, the Miranda rights aren't necessary before questions are asked. Otherwise, someone could commit murder, self incriminate themselves to a cop and never be charged.

2007-12-08 21:51:05 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

I think they can. In the law there is a compcept called assumption of risk. As an adult if you go out in public and do drugs/over drink and get arrested that is something one could summize as a logical conclusion to teh behavior. And the behavior began when that person chose (while sober) to get tore down in a public arena where he/she gets arrested.

2007-12-09 01:50:45 · answer #3 · answered by BoogyBoo 5 · 0 0

you cannot mirandize a mentally unstable person (this includes an inebriated / high person). if they were mirandized under the influence, anything they say is inadmissable, therefore good officers know to wait and at least hold you in lock-up. they do have the right to hold you in lock-up if the person is under the influence.

2007-12-08 21:49:44 · answer #4 · answered by javier 4 · 1 1

...Intoxication is not a defense unless it is forced... if someone forced the person to get drunk...actually forced them to drink (which is highly unlikely) then all the Police have to do is offer the Miranda warning and like "they" say... "anything you say, can, and will be used against you in a Court of Law"...

2007-12-08 22:07:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

THeir state is taken into account; but all the police can do is obey the law. Lawyer's job to have the incriminating testimony tossed out.

2007-12-08 23:17:40 · answer #6 · answered by wizjp 7 · 1 0

yep

I'm just moving through real quick today, doing cut and paste answers...this part is cut and pasted, but the sentence above was not. I mean every word of it, even if it's just one word. Today is a points day. Rock on ....

2007-12-09 03:22:57 · answer #7 · answered by Zipperhead 6 · 0 0

Most law enforcement officials will let a person sober before they read then there rights

2007-12-08 21:46:20 · answer #8 · answered by William R 3 · 1 1

let them sober up

2007-12-08 21:30:59 · answer #9 · answered by JOHN 7 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers