The legitimacy of the criminal justice system is constantly questioned and challenged by not only victims of crime, but also those of accused of committing crimes and by the public. When should someone be read their Miranda Rights? Why do a number of people confess to their crimes while others do not? What makes an interrogation legal? How are interrogations legal? These questions, often demanded by the public, challenge the lawfulness of a common criminal justice practice. Richard Leo, a law professor, proceeds to analyze a few of these questions in, “Inside the Interrogation Room” by creating a study that investigates the practices within the interrogation room.
The term “Miranda Rights” stems from a famous case that occurred during the 1960s in which a man named Ernesto Miranda was accused of the rape and kidnapping of an eighteen year old woman. After an …show more content…
He was able to obtain this data by observing interrogations both on tape at the Southville and Northville Police Departments and in person with the LPD. While it is commonly believed that having the presence of a third person during an interrogation will alter the behavior of a detective, Leo’s observations proved differently. He did not notice any difference between the interrogations that he was not allowed to attend, but still put his ear to the door and the interrogations in which he was in the room. Even while being in attendance, he noticed that one detective ignored a suspect’s request to remain silent and for legal counsel. The same detective even Leo for suggestions to gain confessions for the future. Clearly, having a bystander did not change the actions of the detectives that Leo
The term “Miranda Rights” stems from a famous case that occurred during the 1960s in which a man named Ernesto Miranda was accused of the rape and kidnapping of an eighteen year old woman. After an …show more content…
He was able to obtain this data by observing interrogations both on tape at the Southville and Northville Police Departments and in person with the LPD. While it is commonly believed that having the presence of a third person during an interrogation will alter the behavior of a detective, Leo’s observations proved differently. He did not notice any difference between the interrogations that he was not allowed to attend, but still put his ear to the door and the interrogations in which he was in the room. Even while being in attendance, he noticed that one detective ignored a suspect’s request to remain silent and for legal counsel. The same detective even Leo for suggestions to gain confessions for the future. Clearly, having a bystander did not change the actions of the detectives that Leo