But don’t say “I want a lawyer, dawg” because then the police are allowed to assume you were asking for a lawyer dog, and as there aren’t any, you’re fucked.
I beg to differ, although he acts for the prosecution.
True, pretty generally. It varies by state but some of them, you have to produce an ID when asked by an officer, others only if you are “detained” – a step short of actual arrest but still involves probable cause. If I was pulled over by a traffic cop and asked, “Do you know why I stopped you?” I would answer, “I prefer you tell me, officer.”
Audit the Audit is a YouTube channel that collects police-citizen interactions from other YouTube sources and grades them depending on how it goes, citing the laws in that particular jurisdiction. Time after time he down checks the citizen for not shutting up when it’s in his best interest, either to deescalate a situation where the cop is being a jerk, or to avoid handing the prosecutor a conviction on a plate. One remarkable time both sides were awarded “F” grades.
I always liked the advice given by these guys (they seem sketchy as hell but the advice is sound). Video is 1 minute long:
Just a WAG, but when someone invokes their rights and refuses to talk, it doesn’t make for good TV; it’s boring and uninteresting, and few people want to watch that. If I were a producer, I would only want to show segments where the suspect does not invoke their rights.
There are You-tube videos of Russell Williams’ interviews (he is the ex RCAF Colonel who committed a bunch of sex offences and two murders) and he’s very arrogant and cocky at the start of the interview. The footage is fascinating and horrible at the same time.
If you are detained but not yet arrested, then that becomes very questionable. If you are not “free to go” then you must be Mirandized.
Well, I have seen it, many times, but no where near as commonly as it should occur.
And a lot of Perps are just plain stupid.
Yep.
I would think there is a big gray area here.
For instance, if you get pulled over for a traffic violation you are not “free to go” but the officer can ask you questions and I suspect they can use your answers against you in court despite no Miranda warning.
On the flip side, if they have you in a police interrogation room and keep you there for eight hours and won’t let you leave I can see that as a problem. BUT…I bet you have to ask to leave which many will not think they can do. If you just stay there of your own accord then the police are not really detaining you (you just think you are detained).
@velomont mentioned Russell Williams above. I looked up a YouTube video and this is an example of being questioned without being arrested (this was in Canada so I do not know how things work there). Williams is voluntarily blabbing without being arrested and digs his own hole.
Yes it’s very interesting in that respect. It seems that he was phoned at home and invited to pop in for an interview on a Sunday evening. The detective, OPP detective Jim Smyth, had certainly done his homework. There are a couple of one hour versions (one of which was shown on a Canadian current events show) which are fairly sanitized. And then there are some that are several hours long, which include the tragic, vile details of Williams’ crimes.
They’re fascinating to watch, however, and quite the contrast to the interrogations shown on TV police shows.
That’s true, but conversely you always have the right to remain silent when talking to a police officer, whether you’ve been arrested, detained or making chit-chat at a backyard barbecue. As the officer in the video says, that’s why it’s a Miranda warning – it doesn’t give you any rights, but rather advises you of your rights and requires that you waive them for the officer to ask questions and have your answers be admissible.
True, but often you do have to identify yourself… but nothing else.
Are you certain about that? I thought you only had to be Mirandized if you were going to be questioned.
Yes, but my comment has to be taken in context of this thread about police interrogations.
In most States, a traffic ticket is not a “crime”.
Investigatory stops (or “detentions”) must be no longer than necessary and officers must investigate with the least intrusive means that are reasonably available. When an officer prolongs a detention beyond what is brief and cursory and broadens it, then the detention may turn into a de facto arrest—that is, an actual but not official arrest.
Not quite. If you are in custody and being interrogated you must be Mirandized.
The law draws a distinction between being in custody and merely detained. A custodial interrogation requires a formal detention (usually, handcuffs are deployed) and some degree of isolation - being brought down to the station, or put in the back of a police car - whereas you can be detained in public, as when standing on the side of the road. When merely detained (as with a traffic stop) you don’t need to be issued a Miranda warning.
Similarly, Miranda only applies to interrogation, which is to say, asking questions designed to incriminate you. Routine booking questions, even of a person who is in custody (such as asking for your name, address, or date of birth) are not subject to Miranda.
I disagree with this. You can be entitled to Miranda without regard to an arrest, just as you don’t have to be mirandized once you are arrested.
Miranda applies to interrogation. It has nothing to do with arrest.
Officer #1: @Moriarty, would you come to the station and answer some questions?
@Moriarty: Sure, I’ll be there tomorrow at 1p.
Do they have to Mirandize you?
Read the Nolo cite.
Yes. Context.
Yes, unless you are questioned solely as a witness. Assuming they are actually going to question you, as said. (this was added for the nitpickers here 
)
Not if it’s a voluntary conversation. And they would have a good argument that it was, if I agreed to show up.
Now, like any issue, this does become fact dependent. Did the police bring me into a back room, which was being recorded, then leave me isolated for an extended period of time? Did they discourage me from leaving when I got uncomfortable with their questions? Did they deny me bathroom breaks or a drink, and instead tried to wear me down with a ceaseless parade of interrogators? A voluntary conversation can become a custodial interrogation; these are hardly static concepts.
(That’s why lawyers just want their clients to shut up! Miranda has a bunch of exceptions, and it’s just easiest if nothing was said at all. If somebody is speaking to police thinking “they’ll never be able to use this - they forgot a technicality!” they are almost certainly wrong).
Cops frequently call up suspects in battery cases to get “their side of the story” right before they arrest them. They don’t mirandize them when they do. If the person agrees to speak to the cop, it becomes evidence that ends up in a police report, and potentially available at trial.
If you ever think “the cops didn’t mirandize me, so I’m only a witness here, and I don’t need to worry about what I tell them being used against me”, you are mistaken.