United States Government: Democracy in Action

Introduction
In Miranda v. Arizona, Chief Justice Warren stated: "We have concluded that without proper safeguards the process of in-custody interrogation of persons suspected or accused of crime contains inherently compelling pressures which work to undermine the individual's will to resist and to compel him to speak where he would not otherwise do so freely. In order to combat these pressures and to permit a full opportunity to exercise the privilege against self-incrimination, the accused must be adequately and effectively apprised of his rights and the exercise of those rights must be fully honored." In this activity, you will learn why the Court introduced the Miranda Rule to the American criminal justice system.

Destination Title: Miranda v. Arizona

Note: Clicking on the link above will launch a new browser window.
Need help using your browser for this activity? Click here for Tips.

Use the information you found to answer the following questions.

1			How does Chief Justice Warren define custodial interrogation?
2			What must a person who has been taken into custody be told before questioning can begin?
3			What did the Wickersham Commission Report state was the danger of third degree interrogations?
4			According to the document, what is the importance of having counsel present during interrogation?
5			Do you agree or disagree with the following dissenting opinions from Justice Harlan and Justice White: "The Court is taking a real risk with society's welfare in imposing its new regime on the country. The social costs of crime are too great to call the new rules anything but a hazardous experimentation." "The rule announced today will measurably weaken … criminal law." Write a short essay on whether you think the Miranda Rules are necessary in today's criminal justice system, and why.