Week Four Discussion

How can a defendant challenge the admissibility of a piece of evidence that might be used against their interests? What is it called when a defendant makes such aThe Miranda decision goes back to March 2, 1963, when an 18 year old Phoenix woman told police that she had been taken away and driven to the desert and raped. Detectives questioning her story gave her a polygraph test, but the results were not very accurate. They then tracked the license plate number of a car that looked like the one of her attacker's brought police to Ernesto Miranda, who had a prior record as a peeping tom. The woman didn’t identify Miranda in a line-up, so he was brought into police custody and interrogated. What happened next was disagreement, but officers left the interrogation with a sense that Miranda was guilty but he later rejected the belief, unaware that he didn't have to say anything at all.

This was the crucial point of the issue in Miranda v Arizona. In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was accused of kidnapping and raping an 18 year old, retarded woman. He was brought in for questioning, and confessed to the crime. He was not told that he did not have to speak or that he could have a lawyer present. The Miranda ruling shocked the law-enforcement community and was critically debated. Critics of the Miranda decision said that the court, in attempting to protect the rights of individuals, had seriously weakened law-enforcement agencies. In the United States these safeguards have been placed on police to ensure legality in the interrogation procedure.

What are effective techniques for interviewing a person within the criminal justice system? How do effective interview techniques affect overall communication within the criminal justice system?