The Miranda warning comes from one of the biggest legal
cases of the 1960's and thanks to countless arrest scenes in TV and movies, it’s
one of the best-known applications of the Fifth Amendment. But what you don’t
know about Miranda could be more significant than you think.
Currently, there is a big debate about the Miranda warning
and Boston terror suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Federal investigators said after
Tsarnaev’s detention that he would not be read his Miranda rights under
something called the “public safety exemption.”
Under the exemption, police can interrogate a suspect
without advising him or her of Miranda rights if they believe the suspect could
have information about an imminent threat to public safety.
That exemption allowed investigators to interrogate Tsarnaev
while in custody, without informing Tsarnaev of his rights to a lawyer and his
right to stay silent.
According to an AP report, after 16 hours of questioning, a
representative of the United States Attorney’s office read Tsarnaev his Miranda
warning, and the suspect stopped talking to investigators.
The “Miranda” in the Miranda warning was Ernesto Miranda. He
was arrested in March 1963 in Phoenix and confessed while in police custody to
kidnapping and rape charges. His lawyers sought to overturn his conviction
after they learned during a cross-examination that Miranda was never told he had
the right to a lawyer and had the right to remain silent. (Miranda had signed a
confession that acknowledged that he understood his legal rights.)
The Supreme Court overturned Miranda’s conviction in 1966 in
its ruling for Miranda v. Arizona, which established guidelines for how
detained suspects are informed of their constitutional rights.
The Miranda warning actually includes elements of the Fifth
Amendment (protection against self-incrimination), the Sixth Amendment (a right
to counsel) and the 14th Amendment (application of the ruling to all 50
states).
However, there are common misunderstandings about what
Miranda rights are, and how they can protect someone under criminal
investigation.
First, there is not one official Miranda warning that is read
to a suspect by a police officer. Each state determines how their law
enforcement officers issue the warning. The Supreme Court requires that a person
is told about their right to silence, their right to a lawyer (including a
public defender), their ability to waive their Miranda rights, and that what
they tell investigators under questioning, after their detention, can be used
in court.
The Miranda warning is only used (or "should only be used") by law enforcement when a
person is in police custody and usually under arrest or is not free to leave a custodial situation and is about to be
questioned. Anything you say to an investigator or police officer before you’re
taken into custody—and read your Miranda rights—can be used in a court of law,
which includes interviews where a person is free to leave the premises and
conversations at the scene of an alleged crime.
In fact, Ernesto Miranda came into a Phoenix police station
voluntarily to answer questions in 1963 and also participated in a police lineup.
The police can ask you questions about identification,
including your name and address, without a Miranda warning. And they can use
any spontaneous expressions made by you as evidence—for example, if you say
something without the prompting of police before you’re taken into custody.
Of course, you’re still protected by your Miranda
rights after you’re detained even if you waive them after an arrest. At any
time, during an interrogation, you can stop answering questions and ask for a
lawyer.
In the case of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, investigators probably
felt they had enough evidence to charge him and win a case in court without any
of the information Tsarnaev volunteered before he was read his rights.
As for Ernesto Miranda, though his original conviction was
set aside by the Supreme Court ruling, he was retried and convicted, and was in
jail until 1972, then in and out of jail several more times until 1976. After
being released in 1976, he was fatally stabbed during a bar fight. His
suspected killer was read his Miranda rights and did not answer questions from police.
There was never a conviction in Miranda’s death.
