Miranda vs. Arizona

Miranda vs. Arizona Miranda vs. Arizona was the case that altered the criminal justice system. It gives criminals the rights they do not deserve. Ernesto Miranda was the man who was responsible for the change in law enforcement. He argued that he was not informed of his rights during his arrest and his Fifth and Sixth amendments were violated. After that, the Miranda Rights were established to protect the suspect from refusing to answer self-incriminating questions and the right to an attorney. The Fifth Amendment’ s rights protection against self- incrimination and double jeopardy, and right to a grand jury indictment . The Sixth Amendment’s right to a speedy and public trial, trial by jury, confrontation and cross-examination of witnesses, and counsel. Before the Miranda decision, criminals were given very few rights and were always presumed to be guilty. They were hardly informed of their rights and were sometimes beaten. Once the Miranda Rights were established, criminals have gotten more freedoms that they deserve. Police officers now have to be careful when they read the Miranda Rights if they read it by memory because any mess up and the criminal can go free. Unless you read it from the small card and make them sign so they acknowledge that you have read them their rights. Creation of the Miranda rights has changed the relationship between citizen state and police suspects. Citizens now have the right to be informed and assurance that they will be protected by institutional power. Suspects can now anybody that they had nothing to with it. The Miranda warnings are rights that are not protected by the Constitution. They are simply a precaution to guarantee protection against self –incrimination. Without the Miranda rights, the treatment of criminals would not be fair.

If a criminal remains silent throughout the interrogation , the interrogation must stop and a the criminal asks for an attorney , the interrogation must stop until the attorney