Preview

The Privilege of Silence

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
3683 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Privilege of Silence
How Should China Establish The Privilege of Silence System in Criminal Proceedings?
Wenxuan Ma

1. The origin and the connotations of the Privilege of Silence.
"Miranda warning" originated from a case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1966: an 18-year-old girl was kidnapped and raped, she identified that it was Miranda who did that. The police interrogated Miranda and used his confession as the hearing testimony. After Miranda was convicted he appealed to the Supreme Court on the grounds that the police did not inform him of the right to remain silent, and his confession was concocted under pressure. He said that if he had been told to have a privilege of silence, he would have not made up that confession. After considering all the arguments, the United States Supreme Court ruled the Miranda confession invalid. Because of this jurisprudence, when arresting or interrogating suspects, the police need to say the "Miranda warning" first. This is how the privilege of silence was born in the judicial system.
The Privilege of Silence contains the following connotations: First, the suspect has no obligation to say words which might be detrimental to his/her own, the prosecution agencies or the courts can not use inhuman or degrading methods to force him to say; Second, the suspect has the right to always keep silent during the interrogation, and the judge can not make the adjudication against him/her because his/her silence; Third, before the suspect says the favorable or unfavorable word to him/her, he/she has the right to know the consequences of these words. And he/she must be voluntary to say. If the suspect was forced to speak, the court cannot use these words as the evidence.

2. The Privilege of Silence in China
In China, the Privilege of Silence has not yet been established. This is inseparable with China's actual situation. In China’s judicial practice, on one hand, due to the comparatively poorly developed investigation technology, the testimony of the

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    The Miranda rights are the rights a police offer is required to say to someone when the officer arrests that person. It is the warning that officers of the law give suspects so they know about their rights before they are interrogated. It was a law made after the conclusions of the Miranda vs. Arizona case. The case was very close as it was a 5-4 decision. The court ruled that any type of evidence, whether it is incriminating or proof of innocence, can be used as evidence in a case; however it can only be used if the police let the suspect know that they have the right to an attorney before and during questioning and also that the suspect can be silent to avoid self-incrimination before an interrogation. It is now a staple when police arrests are made. In this paper, I will explain why I believe that the Miranda Rights are not necessary anymore.…

    • 922 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The rights you are read while being placed under arrest are the Miranda rights. They state that what you say will be used against you in court and that you have the right to an attorney. These rights are read to protect your freedom and to inform you of your constitutional rights. It became procedure to state the rights after the Miranda vs. Arizona case. Ernesto Miranda was sentenced to 20-30 years in prison for counts of kidnapping and rape. In court, Miranda argued that he did not know his rights and that they should have been told to him. He is the reason that criminal suspects receive more justice from police officers.…

    • 770 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Miranda Rights are part of a preventative criminal procedure rule that states law enforcement are required to administer Miranda Rights to an individual who is in custody and is subject to direct questioning for a criminal violation of law. When a person is detained or taken into custodial arrest and interrogated for a criminal offense, if he or she wishes to remain silent the individual must expressly state that he or she chooses to remain silent. In addition, if the individual asserts that he or she wishes to speak to an attorney or have an attorney present, police must then cease interrogations and wait until…

    • 524 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda v. Arizona is a case that enabled the Supreme Court to fully identify and reiterate the rights of the accused and the responsibilities of the police when arresting someone. The “Miranda Rights,” or “Miranda Warnings” are based off of these legal obligations: “Police must warn a suspect “prior to any questioning that he has the right to remain silent, that anything he says can be used against him in a court of law, that he has the right to the presence of an attorney, and that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any questioning if he so desires.”…

    • 746 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The "Miranda rule," which makes a confession inadmissible in a criminal trial if the accused was not properly advised of his rights, has been so thoroughly integrated into the justice system that any child who watches television can recite the words: "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney" Yet the 1966 Supreme Court ruling in Miranda v. Arizona remains the subject of often heated debate, and has had a great impact on law enforcement in the U.S.…

    • 1557 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    It is important for the police to read you your Miranda Rights because, if they don’t read your rights when you are being questioned, anything you say can’t be held against you. If they don’t read your rights, and you come clean about everything it won’t matter. You could be in court on trial telling them everything, but if they didn’t read your rights they have to let you go. It is also very important for people to hear their rights, so that they know they don't have to talk if they do not wish to; and that they will be provided an attorney if needed.…

    • 487 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In order for an admission to be admissible in court, prior to interrogation, the individual must first be informed in clear and unequivocal terms that he has the right to remain silent. In addition, the warning to remain silent must be accompanied by the explanation that anything can be used against the individual in court, and that the individual has the right to have an attorney present during interrogation, and if they can not afford one, then one will be appointed to them. Also, if the individual waives his right to remain silent and for counsel to be present, the police must show that the waiver was made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently.…

    • 765 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Miranda warning is a statement that informs individuals of their Fifth Amendment rights. It is needed anytime custodial interrogation takes place or when a person has been taken into custody or has otherwise been deprived of freedom. However, the Supreme Court has said that Miranda warnings are not constitutionally guaranteed, but rather they exist to aid in the protection of Fifth Amendment rights. So essentially, the purpose of Miranda warnings are only to decide on the admissibility of evidence in a court of law.…

    • 256 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of law. You have the right to an attorney, if you cannot afford an attorney one will be provided for you. These famous words came from Miranda vs. Arizona, a Supreme Court case that took place March 13, 1963 when Ernesto Miranda was arrested by the Phoenix Police Department, who failed to advise him of his rights to an attorney and his rights to remain silent. This case has given alleged offenders a chance to have their voice be heard and gives them an opportunity to have a fair trial.…

    • 906 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Miranda Warning must be given before interrogation when a suspect has been taken into custody. Even criminal suspects maintain certain civil rights. In order for the information obtained during an interrogation to be used in a criminal case the Miranda Warning must be given. Suspects are reminded of their rights which include the right to remain silent, should they choose to make a statement, the statement can and will be used against them in a court of law, they have a right to have an attorney present at the time of interrogation, or consult an attorney, and if they cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for them by the state.…

    • 113 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In Canadian criminal law there has been no issue more contentious than that of the confession and its admissibility in court. Prior to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the only question for the court was the reliability of a forced confession. Since 1982, the Supreme Court of Canada, through the application of the Charter, continues to redraw the rules on confessions and evidence admissibility. This paper takes the position that the manner in which a confession has been obtained has become more important than its factual reliability, based upon relevant decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada. To understand current judicial thought on admissibility of confessions, this paper will discuss historical developments in this field and the need to keep justice out of disrepute. This paper will examine several significant cases in which the courts were called upon to balance the need to convict criminals with the need to protect the rights of these same accused person granted by the Charter. Ultimately, through examination of these cases and other relevant documents such at the United Nations Convention Against Torture, this paper will conclude whether a forced but reliable pre-Charter confession discussed in R vs. Wray would be admissible in the legal landscape of today.…

    • 306 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Essay On Miranda Rights

    • 539 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The Miranda warning is important because it lets the person in custody know what their rights are. It lets the suspect know that they are protected and that they have the right to counsel. It also lets them know they have the right to remain silent. It also lets them know that anything they say can and will be used against them in a court of law. The Miranda rights lets the suspect know they have the right to speak to an attorney and have an attorney present while being questioned. The Miranda rights are important because their are a lot of things a suspect needs to know when being arrested or being questioned by police.…

    • 539 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    2. The right of silence and presumption of innocence:At Common Law, such right is limited. Some statutory offenses now require the defendant to perform certain acts or else he can be found guilty for not doing so. That means that an accused person has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law. Although innocence is presumed at Common Law, the onus of proof is on the defendant in certain offenses as enacted by statutes.…

    • 1063 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    From the Western point of view China’s Criminal Justice System has a large number of deficiencies[1]. The case of prohibition of torture and exclusion of illegally obtained evidence was not exempt from those criticisms. On 2009, the Executive Director of the Asia Program at Human Rights Watch, says: “The criminal justice system remains plagued by forced confessions and torture…"[2] However, it must be recognized that since 1979, when the former criminal procedure law was adopted, until the 2010’ exclusionary rules of illegally obtained evidence, and even more recently the draft of the Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China, China has been taking steps to major reforms[3]. As some scholars stated, China’s legal system is a work in progress, and the purpose of this paper is to see how that progress is taking place with respect of prohibition of torture.…

    • 5030 Words
    • 21 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    S78 and 76 Pace

    • 3788 Words
    • 16 Pages

    This essay will critically examine entrapment in the light of judicial discretion and the courts power to stay proceedings. It shall also critically discuss the relationship between the two.…

    • 3788 Words
    • 16 Pages
    Powerful Essays