SCOTUS Says You Can't Sue the Cops for Violating Your Miranda Rights

reason.com

49 points·fortran77··9 comments

I was told in civics class the police have no obligation to Mirandize you.

If they don’t Mirandize you, anything you tell them is inadmissible in court. So it’s usually a good idea to do it.

But if police are, say, detaining rioters, and have decided they’re not going to question anybody, it might be faster and easier to just arrest folks.

It says you can't sue cops in civil actions for damages. Such confessions are still inadmissible in criminal court.

The same SCOTUS that maintains that being provably innocent isn’t a valid reason to postpone execution? Unbelievable!

Anything you say can and will be used against you.

There never really was Miranda rights, just lots of fighting over technicality

How likely are you to remember your rights when you are losing your freedom?

You still have the rights though, and this ruling doesn't take them away. If you're not cautioned, anything you say still cannot be used against you. In many cases any un-cautioned incriminating but now inadmissible information you provide will so poison the prosecution case as to completely invalidate any case they try to bring.

The premise of un-Mirandized statements "poisoning" the prosecution is the rosiest view I have ever heard about getting arrested. That is exactly how it does not work. A defendant has to hire an attorney to have a chance getting such statements excluded, and publicity about the same could easily poison a jury pool.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com