The Miranda ruling : its past, present, and future / Lawrence S. Wrightsman and Mary L. Pitman.

By: Contributor(s): Material type: TextSeries: American Psychology-Law Society seriesPublication details: Oxford ; New York, N.Y. : Oxford University Press, 2010.Description: xiii, 190 p. ; 25 cmISBN:
  • 9780199730902 (hardbound)
  • 0199730903 (hardbound)
  • 9780199750511 (e-book)
  • 0199750513 (e-book)
Subject(s): LOC classification:
  • KF 9625 .W75 2010
Contents:
Series foreword -- Preface -- Acknowledgments -- 1: Public image of Miranda and why it is incomplete -- 2: What led up to the Miranda decision? -- 3: Decision in Miranda v Arizona -- 4: Limitations of the original opinion -- 5: Problems with the comprehension of the Miranda rights among vulnerable suspects -- 6: Supreme Court decisions since Miranda -- 7: Police reactions to the Miranda requirements -- 8: Future of the Miranda ruling -- References -- Index.
Summary: Synopsis: Where did Miranda go wrong? The purpose of this book is to identify and describe four problems with the implementation of the Miranda decision and to suggest remedies in order to have it achieve its original purpose. The four problems identified in the book are: 1. The justices, in placing restrictions of the questioning of suspects, limited these rights only to those suspects who were "in custody." The term "in custody" is vague-legally vague as well as vague to the layperson. It permits the police to question suspects without giving them their Miranda rights in those settings where it is unclear whether custody is present. 2. The Miranda warnings may not be fully understood by many suspects. There is no country-wide standardization of what is said; there are literally thousands of different versions of "the" Miranda warnings in use by different police departments in the United States. 3. Police training manuals, while recognizing the right to a "Miranda warning," have developed many ways to circumvent giving the warnings or ignoring a response in which a suspect does decide to remain silent or ask for an attorney. 4. In the 40 years since the Miranda law was established, the Supreme Court and lower courts have made decisions eroding their application. Can the original goal of the authors of the Miranda law be salvaged? This book examines the state of interrogations and the state of the law before the Miranda decision was made, the purposes and nature of the decision, and proposes recommendations for reinstituting the original goals.
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
Star ratings
    Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)

Includes bibliographical references (p. 173-185) and index.

Series foreword -- Preface -- Acknowledgments -- 1: Public image of Miranda and why it is incomplete -- 2: What led up to the Miranda decision? -- 3: Decision in Miranda v Arizona -- 4: Limitations of the original opinion -- 5: Problems with the comprehension of the Miranda rights among vulnerable suspects -- 6: Supreme Court decisions since Miranda -- 7: Police reactions to the Miranda requirements -- 8: Future of the Miranda ruling -- References -- Index.

Synopsis: Where did Miranda go wrong? The purpose of this book is to identify and describe four problems with the implementation of the Miranda decision and to suggest remedies in order to have it achieve its original purpose. The four problems identified in the book are: 1. The justices, in placing restrictions of the questioning of suspects, limited these rights only to those suspects who were "in custody." The term "in custody" is vague-legally vague as well as vague to the layperson. It permits the police to question suspects without giving them their Miranda rights in those settings where it is unclear whether custody is present. 2. The Miranda warnings may not be fully understood by many suspects. There is no country-wide standardization of what is said; there are literally thousands of different versions of "the" Miranda warnings in use by different police departments in the United States. 3. Police training manuals, while recognizing the right to a "Miranda warning," have developed many ways to circumvent giving the warnings or ignoring a response in which a suspect does decide to remain silent or ask for an attorney. 4. In the 40 years since the Miranda law was established, the Supreme Court and lower courts have made decisions eroding their application. Can the original goal of the authors of the Miranda law be salvaged? This book examines the state of interrogations and the state of the law before the Miranda decision was made, the purposes and nature of the decision, and proposes recommendations for reinstituting the original goals.

There are no comments on this title.

to post a comment.