¶ … Criminal Justice & Criminology
Has the Miranda vs. Arizona ruling decreased the percentage of arresting official violations of defendant Fifth Amendment rights?
(Rian)
CJ327W Research Methods in Criminal Justice
The Miranda vs. Arizona ruling has attracted notable attention to the treatment of the accused in the hands of the law. Specifically, the ruling affirmed the rights to the accused under the law and to the legal rights of the accused. The research was to reveal the degree of law enforcement lack of enforcing the Miranda rights to the accused. A questionnaire presented to four group types that have a stakeholder interest in the law enforcement and legal rights aspect of the case was distributed to determine the activity relevant to Miranda enforcement process. The findings are expected to reveal abuse within the system and a notable increase in the Miranda violations for the accused.
Purpose & Audience
The Miranda vs. Arizona (III, G.C.T., 2000) decision ostensibly produced a profound transition in the U.S. legal system. Indeed, M v A is a particular Supreme Court ruling verified the rights of the defendant when placed under arrest and coerced (Kassin, Leo, Meissner, Richman, Colwell, 2007) using intimidation to produce a confession under duress. Now in the 21st century, we often hear of violations regarding defendant rights (Criminal Law Reporter, 2000) when placed under arrest. (Saltzburg, 2009) Specifically, often we hear of violations of the defendant Fifth Amendment right to remain silent and obtain an attorney for representation.
As the story goes, an individual is picked up on the street and told that he/she "matches the profile," of a suspected criminal in the area. The now labelled defendant, for lacking a reliable alibi to account for his whereabouts given the time range of the incident, then arrested and brought to the station for questioning and subsequent interrogation with the intention of producing a confession.
The purpose of this research is to acknowledge this particular problem concerning the street level bureaucratic process (Leo, 1996) of prejudicial prosecution. The audience, is comprehensive and includes police personnel, judges, defence and prosecution attorneys, legal researchers, sheriffs, detectives, police sergeants and chief of police, state troopers, highway patrol officers, state ranger patrols, and all other officials with the granted authority and means to detain, arrest, and jail. H0: There is no difference in the percentage of arresting official violations of defendant Fifth Amendment right.
Literature Review
A review of the literature of Miranda v Arizona (Asch, 1971) reveals the Supreme Court decision to have potentially caused the increased difficulty in the daily work activity of the police officer. Given the age of the study, the indication of the early affect of the decision is evident as a framework for police officers to not limit the protection of the accused under the law. Asch (1971) argues that such protection is long overdue and is certainly in need however, has added the additional yet undesirable result of adding a level of increased difficulty to the officer's job. Additionally, Asch argues for tougher and more stringent "selection, training, and education of police and other criminal justice personnel." (Asch, 1971)
Kilpatrick (1986) argues that the law was a mistake from the beginning. The law obfuscates the fifth and sixth amendment to the U.S. Constitution. "The court has found compulsion where there has not been compulsion; it has elevated investigation to the level of criminal prosecution and it has defined suspect to mean accused." (Kilpatrick, 1986) Kilpatrick deems Miranda v Arizona to be a judiciary approval to refer to the accused, as the 'accused'. As this term is used throughout the paper, the accused is a function of Kilpatrick's understanding to the nature of the ruling.
Escobedo v Illinois (1964) (Kilpatrick, 1986), is a preceding case to Miranda v Arizona that established a broader parameter to include the voluntary contribution of statements by the accused placed under arrest and held in jail however, prior to further adjudication as when indicted or placed for arraignment. The Escobedo ruling set the precedent for deeming such voluntary statements as insubmissible as evidence. The Miranda ruling established the absolute right to counsel prior to interrogation. The Supreme Court ruling Mathis v U.S. (1969) (Kilpatrick, 1986) further went to state Miranda v Arizona succinctly interpreted the fifth amendment in a manner hazardous to the efficient and effective upholding of legal rights for the accused. Brewer v Williams (1977) (Kilpatrick, 1986), defines the Miranda ruling as an injustice and a breach of policeman conduct.
However, what was really the point of the ruling?...
Criminal Profiling as an Aid for Apprehending Serial Killers Popular media loves to emphasize the role of the criminal profiler in apprehending serial killers. It has been a central them in books, television shows, and movies for the past two decades, and the concept of the feisty criminal profiler interviewing wily and brilliant convicted serial killers in an effort to gain insight into active serial killers has become so iconic that
If human behavior can be loosely predicted, then so too can criminal behavior. 4. Criminal profiling is not one hundred percent accurate or valid. It is an inexact science. Results of profiling are close to chance, which is one reason why the process is criticized and used cautiously. Officers of the law may be misled by an inaccurate or hasty profile, and in some cases might even apprehend innocent persons
(Holmes and Holmes 4)" Like any other processes, systems, and/or methodologies, there are several ones involved also in criminal profiling. The two basic ones are criminal investigative analysis and behavioral evidence analysis. The former "employs the psychological typologies to organize information and construct a profile. The premise holds that elements of the crime scene represent the offender's personality and approach aims to provide the most likely characteristics, both personality and
Criminal Profile Detroit The population of young professionals in Downtown Detroit is increasing by the day and so is the retail of the region. There are many luxury buildings that have been built now. The development schemes towards the side of east river are now covering many luxury condominium progresses. This has resulted in attracting many young citizens to the Downtown of the city along with the renewed New Center and
One significant drawback of criminal profiling is the wide variation of results among profilers. Factors that affect this variation includes the difference in investigative background among profilers, which necessarily influences the profiling being done. The prove inconsistency among profiler results demonstrates a basic lack of validity (Young, 2006, p. 22). Godwin (2002, p. 8) also notes that profiling serial murders generally lack a rigorous examination of existing data and contributing
But 50% the sample were recreational weightlifters who only used the drugs casually. Purpose of use thus affected the frequency of use, and different kinds of illicit drugs were also associated with the different abuser profiles. From a criminal profiler's perspective, this suggests that, when examining who uses a particular performance-enhancing drug, a specific 'type' of athlete or non-athlete might be more likely to be associated with the drug, depending
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now