General Question

charrison1170's avatar

Does a cop have to read you your rights at the spot of the arrest?

Asked by charrison1170 (7 points ) February 29th, 2008 from iPhone

I was arrested for a crime that I didnt commit, and I wasnt read my rights untill I was interogated

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

12 Answers

timealker101's avatar

UK or USA? In the UK you must be told the reason for your arrest and be cautioned as soon as is reasonably practicable. You must be given your rights when you are booked in at the police station. You must be told you are entitled to speak to someone, you can consult a solicitor free of charge and you can consult the Codes of Practice governing your detention at the police station.

todaysalibi's avatar

in the US police don’t have to read u ur rights until they question u or interrogate u. Often people misunder stand being detained and being under arrest. They r two different things. Just because they used hand cuffs u are not under arrest until they gave enough to charge u with. That can physical evidence, witness info, or and admission of the crime

squirbel's avatar

My only source is Law & Order (the TV show), so I’d say “yeah, they have to”.

(sorry my source sucks)

Bigtechdude's avatar

Ask the cop if you can leave. If he says no than you are under arrest. The best thing to do is take the 5th. Most of the time you tell on your self. Don’t talk they are the detective let them do there job.

cwilbur's avatar

If your rights were not read to you by the time they question you, anything you say is likely to be thrown out by the judge if your lawyer challenges it. As a result, they read you the Miranda warning as early as possible so that anything you say can be used against you.

peggylou's avatar

squirbel: Your source does NOT suck! I watch Law and Order every day. Although, my son-in-law, who is a lawyer, believes that Law and Order needs more “Objections!” and not so many “In my chambers” to be realistic. It makes him sick to watch my favorite show!

sccrowell's avatar

The police generally read these rights to an individual about to be questioned in custody. “You have the right to remain silent. If you give up the right to remain silent, anything YOU do say CAN and WILL be used against you in a court of law. YOU have the right to an attorney. If YOU desire an attorney and cannot afford one, an attorney will be obtained for you before police questioning.” The Miranda rule was in fact developed to protect your Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
The Miranda warning ensures that people in custody realize they DO NOT have to to the talk to the police without the presence of an attorney. That being said, “If the Miranda warningsas not given before the police started questioning , or if the police continued to question you AFTER you indicated in any manner a desire to consult an attorney before speaking, those statements made by you are generally inadmissible at trial—- They CANNOT be used against you! The police may detain you for short period(generally 24–48 hours) but, ONLY if they have probable cause. After this time period they (the police) must release you or bring formal charges as well as be taken before a judge. Oh!!! Almost forgot… YOU can be rearrested at a later date if the police obtain sufficient evidence. I hope that helped!!! Good luck!

ironhiway's avatar

No, if you said something before they read your rights they may not be able to use it against you. Obviously if you are in trouble whether you are guilty or not you should be talking to your lawyer.

jdvanderk's avatar

Law and Order = not a source for law related questions

there’s so many things wrong about that show…

its entertainment, not legal advice

margeryred's avatar

I appreciate everyone’s responses but not all of them are realistic. First and foremost an officer on the beat usually NEVER reads you your rights nor are they required to until you are arrested “AND” are going to interview/interrogate you. Basic patrol doesn’t have time nor do they have the facilities to effect such actions. Generally when they make an arrest the case is pretty much laid out with a witness, evidence and some sort of statement from the arrested person prior to being in police custody and they will just take the suspect in.

The detectives who then are assigned to the case have “72” hours from the exact time of arrest to either charge or release you (with no formal charges) when that time expires. If they are unable to build the case within that short time period but can in 73 hours they will put their case together and submit it to the Grand Jury for indictment and the suspect/defendant will then eventually have to appear in court and follow through with the adjudication of the case through a plea or trial with an outcome of guilty or not-guilty. (by the way, not guilty does not mean INNOCENT… just not enough evidence to say guilty.)

I would like to state that in this day and age most ALL detectives not only read you your rights multiple times but they now put them in front of a suspect and they have the suspect read them aloud. This is done for two reasons; One.. no chance of denial that your rights were read; two the detective can gauge the subject’s education/communication level. If he/she cannot read those rights aloud he/she may not be able to write/read a statement. In that case a detective would get alternative methods of taking that statement, such as recordings (video/audio) or multiple witness detectives.

Reading a suspect/subject their rights is the best part of the interview. You are telling the person they have no obligation to speak to you under any circumstances. I hate to say this though… a lot of “criminal” minded people have huge egos and they believe they are smart and can out smart a detective (s). At times they believe that they can talk their way out of things as they have usually done their entire lives. Often times they believe they will look more guilty if they don’t talk, but just do it slyly.

People who are innocent do have a tough way to go, becuase there are circumstancial situations that can appear to point directly to you… but if you don’t have anything to hid and can back up what you are saying then you really don’t have anything to worry about.

In this day and age juries will not convict without a great amount of evidence and the comments of a victim or witness is usually never enough. Juries want DNA and huge amounts of forensic evidence. Unfortunately, real police work is not like TV/Movies… there is rarely money to buy fancy machines that do all those fancy scanning that can find a grain of sand in a carpet to match up to a specific grain of sand of a special beach… Reality is that cases are usually much more simple and can usually be plead out to something that both sides (prosecutor/defense attorney) can live with… the sad part is the victim who had no rights at the time of their attack continue to have very little rights throughout the entire criminal justice process.

Next time you want to bash the police or the justice system for their actions please keep in mind that behind EVERY crime are innocent victims who didn’t have any rights when they were being violated!!!

katiebitch's avatar

the guy who wrote the novel is a moron

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther