Question

Do you think the Miranda rule is necessary and is a good rule, and is required by the Constitution? How else can the right to prevent self incrimination be protected?

Answer 1

The Miranda rule, accepted by the Supreme Court as a fundamental right in its Miranda v. Arizona decision of 1966, allows suspects to be told of their "prior to questioning" Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights, if their comments are to be used against them in court.

The Miranda warning in the United States is a type of notice typically issued by the police to criminal suspects in police custody informing them of their right to silence; that is, their right to refuse to answer questions or disclose information to law enforcement or other officials. Such rights are also called Miranda rights. The object of such notification is to maintain the admissibility in subsequent criminal proceedings of their statements made during the custodial interrogation.

To "plead the Fifth" means you have the right not to answer questions from the police either while in detention or in court. The right to self-incrimination is outlined in U.S. Fifth Amendment. Constitution which therefore applies to the authority of the federal and local governments. When anyone uses this right, we also say they "plead the Fifth." Besides the right of self-incrimination, the Fifth Amendment protections include other essential safeguards for Americans, including the right to remain quiet while in police custody, habeas corpus writs, and double-threat defense. However, this article focuses exclusively on the Fifth Amendment's own-incrimination provision in legal terms