Miranda rights are a set of rights that an accused individual or suspect has when they are suspected of committing specific offenses has during interrogations and must be told or informed of these rights prior to being questioned.When a police officer goes up to a person with the intent to question them then they do have to read the individual their Miranda Warnings. The reason being is that Miranda rights are only required when the police are questioning you in the context of a criminal investigation and hope to or desire to use your statements as evidence against you. Otherwise, Miranda doesn’t apply and they’re not required to be read. (MirandaWarning.org)
The way that a reasonable person would distinguish the difference between interrogations …show more content…
One common exception to the Miranda Rights is the Public Safety Exception. The Public Safety exceptions happen when there is an imminent danger to the public. An example of this can be when the police arrest a suspected terrorist who may know about a terrorist attack that may be happening soon. So at this point, the police can interrogate the individual to get any critical information from them. Another exception is the routine booking question exception. According to MirandaWarnings.org, “that’s basically a situation where the police question someone, but it’s not really interrogation. They’re asking questions about where do you live? What is your address? What is your profession? What is your date of birth? Your name? Things like that. Even if somebody has invoked their right to remain silent, invoke their Miranda rights, the police are still allowed to ask questions like that because they are thought not to be designed to elicit an incriminating response.” This would just be general everyday information that we share with those around us so there is no serious danger for us to answer those general …show more content…
As stated by FindLaw, “The police, for example, may not use torture techniques, threats, drugging, or inhumane treatment during an interrogation. The police, however, can use lying, trickery, and other types of non-coercive methods to obtain a confession from a suspect.” Officers can use nonviolent ways to obtain information from suspects when they are being questioned however they cannot add use physical force to obtain information. In addition State courts have permitted police to deceive suspects about a range of factual matters, including, for example, falsely stating that incriminating DNA evidence and satellite photography of the crime scene exist” (Najdowski & Bonventre) This means that even though they may not have the evidence or the objective that they have stated above they can still claim that they do to catch the person in the act and allowing them to confess. Lying or deceiving a suspect may seem as a helpful idea to solve crimes but there are precautions that come with lying to a suspect which prohibits police to create or make false statements on a suspect under certain circumstances. In addition, an officer cannot lie to a suspect about possible consequences that they might be facing if they are guilty of committing the crime. Overall, an officer is permitted to lie to a suspect in questioning without falsely making statements about
The way that a reasonable person would distinguish the difference between interrogations …show more content…
One common exception to the Miranda Rights is the Public Safety Exception. The Public Safety exceptions happen when there is an imminent danger to the public. An example of this can be when the police arrest a suspected terrorist who may know about a terrorist attack that may be happening soon. So at this point, the police can interrogate the individual to get any critical information from them. Another exception is the routine booking question exception. According to MirandaWarnings.org, “that’s basically a situation where the police question someone, but it’s not really interrogation. They’re asking questions about where do you live? What is your address? What is your profession? What is your date of birth? Your name? Things like that. Even if somebody has invoked their right to remain silent, invoke their Miranda rights, the police are still allowed to ask questions like that because they are thought not to be designed to elicit an incriminating response.” This would just be general everyday information that we share with those around us so there is no serious danger for us to answer those general …show more content…
As stated by FindLaw, “The police, for example, may not use torture techniques, threats, drugging, or inhumane treatment during an interrogation. The police, however, can use lying, trickery, and other types of non-coercive methods to obtain a confession from a suspect.” Officers can use nonviolent ways to obtain information from suspects when they are being questioned however they cannot add use physical force to obtain information. In addition State courts have permitted police to deceive suspects about a range of factual matters, including, for example, falsely stating that incriminating DNA evidence and satellite photography of the crime scene exist” (Najdowski & Bonventre) This means that even though they may not have the evidence or the objective that they have stated above they can still claim that they do to catch the person in the act and allowing them to confess. Lying or deceiving a suspect may seem as a helpful idea to solve crimes but there are precautions that come with lying to a suspect which prohibits police to create or make false statements on a suspect under certain circumstances. In addition, an officer cannot lie to a suspect about possible consequences that they might be facing if they are guilty of committing the crime. Overall, an officer is permitted to lie to a suspect in questioning without falsely making statements about