Question

Given the limited impact of the exclusionary rule on crime fighting and Miranda on conviction rates, what purposes do they serve?

Answer 1

After the 1966 Miranda v. Arizona ruling, 50 years later today, whenever arrests are made in the USA, the convicts are told about their Miranda rights. The main idea is to make these rights a deterrent for police misconduct and also to be true to the ideals of life, liberty, justice. The decision that was taken in the famous Miranda v. Arizona case, established that the exclusionary rule (which prohibits obtaining evidence from an unreasonable search violating the fourth amendment) applies to improperly elicited self-incriminatory statements gathered in violation of the Fifth Amendment, and also to all those evidences which are gained in situations where the government violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel.

It serves various purposes like -

It establishes the fact that no one can be above the law. Hence the lawmakers cannot resort to vigilantism to put someone behind bars without actually following the procedures. Also it requires that a proper cause has been established before the search can actually begin. Without this, the government might become the ultimate power and create havoc in the country with its self made flexible laws. Also, because of this, it is assumed that a person is innocence until proven guilty. Moreover, self -incriminatory statements which have been improperly elicited by fraudulent means and also all the evidences which might have been manufactured will not be considered as evidence anymore.