The four accused of murdering Sean Taylor signed “Miranda Waiver” forms, according to ESPN, acknowledging that they agreed to speak to police without their lawyer(s) present.
I was under the impression that once the Miranda rights had been read, verbal agreement to speak without having counsel present constituted a waiver in and of itself.
Is a “Miranda waiver” really just an acknowledgement on a suspect’s part that he has had his rights read to him, or is the suspect actually waiving some provision of his rights?
I think a verbal confirmation is sufficient in most cases, but why not have written proof if they’re willing to sign it? It sure makes it a lot easier to prove that they were given proper Miranda warnings and voluntarily waived their rights if the issue comes up later.
Technically, yes. But later on, this case is likely to see the inside of a courtroom. Let’s suppose that happens, and there’s no signed waiver, just an oral, “Okay, I’ll tell you whatever you want, without a lawyer.” Now it’s trial day, and the accused says he never knowingly and voluntarily waived his rights, so his interrogation and subsequent confession should be inadmissible. What does the State do? Say, “But your honor, he said he waived his rights…”? Pfeh. Better to have something in writing, proving that the waiver was fully understood and voluntary.