Pros And Cons Of Mirande Confessions

728 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The Case Of Torture

Now there are a few reasons why a person would falsely confess to a crime that they did not commit. One of these reasons could be that they may have been tortured into confessing to the crime. Secondly, they could be protecting someone else who committed the crime but they don’t want them to go to prison for one reason or another such as they are young and about to attend college as well as have a bright future ahead of them. Another reason could be that the false confession was gotten by the interrogator’s use of coercive psychological interrogation techniques. It is said that these techniques are so powerful that they can induce false confessions from the mentally retarded, the mentally ill, juveniles as well as other vulnerable suspects. Unfortunately, these are not the only people in whom this technique can get a false confession from but a person of high intelligence that is in full possession of their mental faculties can also fall victim to this technique and confess to a crime they did not commit (nbcnews.com. n.d.).
Once an …show more content…

n.d.). This must happen before they are interrogated in order to preserve the admissibility of the statement or statements they make in connection to a crime. Therefore, once these rights have been read to a person they have a choice whether to say something or not. Furthermore, a person cannot waive these rights unless they knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily are able to do so (psycolegalassessments.com. n.d.). Therefore, if they do confess of a crime after they were read these rights or warning falsely they can be held accountable for their action because they understood their rights but still made a statement and that statement can be used against them in a court of law in order to convict them of the

Show More
Related

  • Wrongful Conviction - A Miscarriage In The Canadian Justice System

    1655 Words  | 4 Pages

    Garrett, B. L. (n.d.). The Substance of False Confessions. Criminal Justice Collection. Retrieved November 23, 2010, from find.galegroup.com.uproxy.library.dc-uoit.ca/gtx/retrieve.do?contentSet=IAC-Documents&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&qrySerId=Locale%28en%2C%2C%29%3AFQE%3D%28su%2CNone%2C28%29%22Wrongful+Convictions+%28Law%29%22%3AAnd%3ALQE%3D%28RE%2CNone%2C3%29ref%24&sgHitCo

    Read More

  • Ernesto Miranda's Case Of Miranda Vs. Arizona

    813 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Supreme Court ruled that due to the coercive nature of the custodial interrogation by police, no confession could be admissible under the Fifth Amendment self-incrimination Clause and Sixth Amendment right to an attorney unless a suspect has been made aware to his rights and the suspect had then waived them

    Read More

  • Distefano's Guilt Summary

    839 Words  | 2 Pages

    The first issue is how he states the fact that he only gave a confession because he is tired and wanted to go home and be done. He assumed that they would let him confess to killing someone and leave. No reasonable person believes that they can confess to murder and then just walk away from a free man. In fact, he didn’t even believe this himself. For in preliminary hearings regarding the validity of the confession one of his arguments was that he thought he was in custody. He states how he felt like he couldn’t leave, there was no way they were going to let a murder suspect walk out of there and he is correct. However, he can’t have it both ways, he can’t reasonably say he thought he would be able to leave after confessing, but then also say that thought he wasn’t free to leave before he even confessed because he was a suspect. This issue is important because it dilutes the strength of his argument as to why he would give a false confession, simply you don’t confess to go home, you confess to go to prison. The other part of DiStefano’s logic which is problematic is how he argues the validity of his confession. He states how factual parts of the confession are wrong or uncorroborated and thus the whole confession must be wrong. However, just because part is wrong this doesn’t change the fact that he confessed, nor the fact that details can be wrong or falsified while the main idea, Christopher DiStefano

    Read More

  • False Interrogation Summary

    702 Words  | 2 Pages

    After reviewing the article “Inside Interrogation: The Lie, The Bluff, and False Confessions”, it became very evident the huge problem with interrogations and false confessions in the criminal justice system is with false confession. Jennifer T. Perillo and Saul M. Kassin crafted three distinct experiments to try and better understand false confessions and how trues the actual numbers in real life are. What Perillo and Kassin were trying to prove is that “the bluff technique should elicit confessions from perpetrators but not from innocents” (Perillo, Kassin 2010). What is called the “Bluff Technique” is an interrogation technique that uses a sort of threat or hint that there is certain proof that a person will think is more of a promise for

    Read More

  • Kansas V. Cheever Supreme Court Case

    805 Words  | 2 Pages

    When a defendant asserts a mental status defense and supports it with evidence, the defendant waives the Fifth Amendment privilege with respect to evidence from a court ordered mental examination used to rebut the defense.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of Miranda Vs Arizona

    716 Words  | 2 Pages

    However, with every rule there also exceptions like: Maryland v. Shatzer, Florida v. Powell, and Berghuis v. Thompkins. Miranda Vs Arizona was a United States Supreme Court case in 1966. The court “ruled that a criminal suspect must make a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary decision to waive certain constitutional rights prior to questioning” (Ortmeier, 2005, 285). This ruling meant that suspects must be aware of their right to remain silent and that if they choose to speak to the police, the conversation can be used against them in a court of law. If they do decide to speak under police it must not be under false promises and or coercion.

    Read More

  • False Confessions and the Norfolk Four Case

    2738 Words  | 6 Pages

    ``In criminal law, confession evidence is a prosecutor’s most potent weapon’’ (Kassin, 1997)—“the ‘queen of proofs’ in the law” (Brooks, 2000). Regardless of when in the legal process they occur, statements of confession often provide the most incriminating form of evidence and have been shown to significantly increase the rate of conviction. Legal scholars even argue that a defendant’s confession may be the sole piece of evidence considered during a trial and often guides jurors’ perception of the case (McCormick, 1972). The admission of a false confession can be the deciding point between a suspect’s freedom and their death sentence. To this end, research and analysis of the false confessions-filled Norfolk Four case reveals the drastic and controversial measures that the prosecuting team will take to provoke a confession, be it true or false.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of The Fifth Amendment

    903 Words  | 2 Pages

    This is derived from the rights Americans have to not be forced to testify against themselves in a criminal case. But, the Fifth Amendment also protects against double jeopardy and gives people charged with a felony the right to a grand jury indictment (Bohm & Haley, 2011). Double jeopardy basically states that if a conviction or acquittal was reached in a criminal case, the person can no longer be tried again for the same offense (Bohm & Haley, 2011). The procedural rights for self-incrimination are also applied to any custodial situations the police conduct. To ensure that statements, or confessions a suspect makes are allowed in court there is a two-prong tests that should be followed. First, is the person considered to be in a custodial situation and two, are the police intending to ask incriminating questions. If yes is the answers to both then the suspect must be read his or her rights. This is known as giving someone his or her Miranda rights derived from the famous case

    Read More

  • Miranda vs. Arizona

    396 Words  | 1 Pages

    This decision requires that unless a suspect in custody has been informed of his constitutional rights before questioning anything he says may not be introduced in a court of law.

    Read More

  • The Difference between the Miranda Rights and the Charter of Rights

    903 Words  | 2 Pages

    Miranda rights, also known as the Miranda warning, is a warning given by police in the United States to suspects in custody before they are interrogated. The name Miranda rights comes from the case Miranda v. Arizona, where the Supreme Court held that the admission of incriminating statements by a suspect who has not been read their rights, violates one's right to counsel. Therefore, if a police officer does not inform a suspect of their Miranda rights, they may not interrogate that person and cannot use that person's statements to incriminate him or her in a court of law (Miranda Warning, 2014).... ... middle of paper ... ...

    Read More

  • The Self-Incrimination Clause of the Fifth Amendment

    2077 Words  | 5 Pages

    The act of interrogation has been around for thousands of years. From the Punic Wars to the war in Iraq, interrogating criminals, prisoners or military officers in order to receive advantageous information has been regularly used. These interrogation techniques can range from physical pain to emotional distress. Hitting an individual with a whip while they hang from a ceiling or excessively questioning them may seem like an ideal way to get them to reveal something, but in reality it is ineffective and . This is because even the most enduring individual can be made to admit anything under excruciating circumstances. In the Fifth Amendment of the Bill of Rights there is a provision (“no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself” ) which reflects a time-honored common principle that no person is bound to betray him or herself or can be forced to give incriminating evidence. This ideology of self-incrimination has been challenged heavily over the past s...

    Read More

  • Anatomy of a False Confession

    1643 Words  | 4 Pages

    Depending on what study is read, the incidence of false confession is less than 35 per year, up to 600 per year. That is a significant variance in range, but no matter how it is evaluated or what numbers are calculated, the fact remains that false confessions are a reality. Why would an innocent person confess to a crime that she did not commit? Are personal factors, such as age, education, and mental state, the primary reason for a suspect to confess? Are law enforcement officers and their interrogation techniques to blame for eliciting false confessions? Regardless of the stimuli that lead to false confessions, society and the justice system need to find a solution to prevent the subsequent aftermath.

    Read More

  • Miranda V. Arizona Case: Ernesto Miranda's Law

    1148 Words  | 3 Pages

    Even if a suspect initially waives his rights, during an interrogation he can halt the process at any time by asking for a lawyer or taking back the waiver. The police, from that moment on, are not allowed to suggest that he or she reconsider (ncpa.org). Because of this, many people feel that this has had a harmful effect on law enforcement. Police have found it much more difficult to get a confession. According to the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), the fraction of suspects questioned who confessed dropped from 49% to 14% in New York and from 48% to 29% in Pittsburg.

    Read More

  • Miranda Rights

    1348 Words  | 3 Pages

    What does this mean to you? Well if you are ever arrested for being suspected of a crime, the police are legally obligated to advise you of your Miranda rights. If they do not do this and they start to ask you questions, and interrogate you, then anything you say cannot be used against you in court, and you could have the charges dropped. The police are not supposed to question you at all unless you have been read your Miranda rights and you then waive those rights. You can waive your rights either verbally tell the officer you waive your rights, or by signing a rights waiver form.

    Read More

  • Restraint and Activism

    379 Words  | 1 Pages

    Miranda v. Arizona is a very important activist decision that required police to inform criminal suspects of their rights before they could be interrogated. These rights include: the right to remain silent, that anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law, you have a right to an attorney, if you cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed to you be the court. In this case the Fifth Amendment's right that a person may not be forced to incriminate one's self was interpreted in an activist way as meaning that one must be aware of this right before on is interrogated by the police. Prior to this ruling it was common practice to force and coerce confessions from criminal suspects who did not know they had the right not to incriminate themselves.

    Read More

More about Pros And Cons Of Mirande Confessions

Open Document