"Participating Miranda"

Abstract

In Miranda v. Arizona (1966) the U.S. Supreme Court held that, before custodial interrogation, the suspect must be informed that (1) he has a right to remain silent, (2) anything he says can be used against him in a subsequent criminal proceeding, (3) he has the right to the presence of an attorney during the interrogation, and (4) if he cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for him at the state's expense. The intent of the Court in Miranda was clearly to undermine subversive attempts by the police to obtain confessions that might be less than voluntary and reliable.