Miranda vs arizona summary

The problem with the Miranda situation is that it was a court’s attempt to bring fair play into a legal system where common sense does not apply. To try to get this fair play into effect, the police would be the agents implementing it by means of the Miranda Warning. The police positively HATED the idea and wanted nothing at all to do with it.

Police officers would go a million miles around the Miranda Warning to avoid using it. Many officers saw the Miranda Warning as being nothing more than a court ordered commercial for attorneys. Why try for a confession when you could make cases using witnesses and evidence? That’s what many officers did.

So it ended up that the Miranda Warning made the police more honest in how they did their jobs and made their cases. Cops didn’t take any more shortcuts by using confessions. That’s really what happened. Cops became much better investigators, report writers and smarter in using evidence.

So why try for a confession to convict a criminal when you could develop your case based on what 6 people told you? What you had to do was make sure that you properly and effectively told your case in your report to the prosecuting attorney. Sure, case development took longer but it was more effective in the long run.

That’s how Miranda vs. Arizona made things work for many modern day law enforcement officers that I know.

Great britain, ireland, and scandinavia.