I was talking to some of my buddies, and one of them said that they knew someone who got off of a drug charge because they weren't read their Miranda rights... while that might be true/possible, I just mentioned to them that you do not need to be read those rights when you are arrested.. only when the officer wants to question you while you are under arrest.
Now they are willing to swear that I am wrong, and I am willing to guarantee they are wrong. I would like something more than a wikipedia article to show them that proves that the constitution does not require the reading of those rights during an arrest. I think they've been watching COPS too much, because it just seems to common to see those words spoken at every arrest.. but that doesn't meant it's required by law.
What is a good source to show them they're wrong? Assuming that they are wrong I guess..
Thanks guys.
Now they are willing to swear that I am wrong, and I am willing to guarantee they are wrong. I would like something more than a wikipedia article to show them that proves that the constitution does not require the reading of those rights during an arrest. I think they've been watching COPS too much, because it just seems to common to see those words spoken at every arrest.. but that doesn't meant it's required by law.
What is a good source to show them they're wrong? Assuming that they are wrong I guess..
Thanks guys.
Comment