A recent study has found that nearly one (1) million U.S. criminal court cases may go nowhere annually because suspects don’t understand their constitutional rights.
This study has been conducted by the American Psychological Association (APA), who is celebrating their 119th association meeting here in Washington, D.C., at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center.
Some psychologists are concerned that this inability to understand their rights in the court system can lead to self-incrimination. The arrest, in essence, could be compromised. This doesn’t necessarily mean the charges should be dismissed, but the Supreme Court requires those cases be reviewed to determine if the defendants knowingly and intelligently waived their rights after a Miranda warning.
“If men or women who have come into the U.S. and don’t have a proper grasp of the English language obviously don’t have a way to know what being Mirandized means,” said Dr. Levin Goodfellow, an attendee of the conference. “That would be like me speaking a foreign language to you and you not understanding a word.”
Charles Abernathy, a returning citizen who lives in Columbia, Maryland remarked via email, “I’ve learned in my thirteen years of going in a out of jail that it don’t matter where the interrogation happens, if a person gets arrested, or are deprived of his/her freedom of action in any significant way, the police have to give a Miranda warning if they want to ask you any questions and expect to use his/her responses as evidence at trial.”
According to the APA press release, University of North Texas psychology professor Richard Rogers, PhD, said, "The public, police and sometimes courts wrongly believe that people in custody understand their rights. Some offenders are street-wise and legally sophisticated, but far more have a limited and often erroneous understanding of Miranda warnings and the underlying constitutional safeguards."
“You can’t expect us to change the laws for these people, “a Washington Metropolitan policeman remarked.
Miranda Rights originated as a result of the 1966 Supreme Court decision in Miranda v. Arizona. Three years prior (1963) in Arizona, Ernesto Miranda was accused of kidnapping and raping an 18-year-old, mildly retarded woman. He was brought in for questioning, and confessed to the crime. Prior to his confession, he was not told that he did not have to speak, or he could have a lawyer present. During his trial, his attorney tried to get the confession thrown out, but the motion was denied. The appeals made its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, where former California Governor Earl Warren served as Chief Justice.
The “Warren Court” ruled suspects in police custody must be informed of their right to remain silent due to the Fifth Amendment's ‘protection against self-incrimination’. Suspects also must be told they have a right to an attorney and an attorney will be appointed if they can't financially afford one.
“More than 800 different versions of Miranda warnings are used by police agencies across the United States, and the warnings vary in reading level from second grade to a post-college level,” Rogers said. “Defendants often assume they know their rights so they don't listen, and the warnings aren't explained well by police,” he continued. “As a result, defendants often wrongly believe their silence can be used against them in court.”
Professor Rogers poured over 9.2 million arrests made in 2009 to do his study (which will be published in APA's flagship journal, American Psychologist, in November 2011), and estimates that 976,000 arrests, or ten (10) percent of the cases, were compromised by problems with Miranda warnings. That estimate includes 360,000 arrests of adults with mental health disorders; 305,000 arrests of adults without mental health disorders; and 311,000 juvenile arrests.
The APA press release said:
He went on to devise a survey with true-or-false questions about Miranda warnings that was completed by 119 college undergraduate students and 149 pretrial defendants at jails in Texas and Oklahoma. It showed 31 percent of the defendants and 36 percent of the undergraduates wrongly believed that their silence could be used as incriminating evidence at trial.
Other misperceptions abound, with many people believing that police can keep interrogating a defendant even though he has requested an attorney but is still waiting for the attorney to arrive, Rogers said.
Some defendants also don't realize detectives can lie during questioning and claim eyewitnesses or other evidence implicates the defendant in an attempt to get him to start talking, according to his presentation. "These false beliefs strike at the heart of highly valued constitutional rights," Rogers said.
Rogers promotes simplifying the language of Miranda Rights/Warnings.
“The language of the warning also should be simplified, and suspects should be told to read it aloud and explain it in their own words to make sure they understand it,” he said. “First time offenders could greatly benefit from this.”
The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union’s) website advises anyone who is (or might be arrested) by law enforcement to do the following:
• Do not resist arrest, even if you believe the arrest is unfair.
• Say you wish to remain silent and ask for a lawyer immediately. Say nothing more.
• You have the right to make a local phone call. The police cannot listen if you call a lawyer.
• Prepare yourself and your family in case you are arrested. Make legal emergency plans.
Special considerations for non-citizens:
- Ask your lawyer about the effect of a criminal conviction or plea on your immigration status.
- Don't discuss your immigration status with anyone but your lawyer.
Abernathy did issue a warning.
“If a person is not in police custody, however, no Miranda warning is required and anything the person says can be used at trial if the person is later charged with a crime,” he wrote.
He concluded by typing, “The Miranda rights are for your protection against self-incrimination only, it won’t prevent you from being arrested.”
#####
For further follow-up on Miranda laws, you can reach Dr. Rogers via email at Richard.Rogers@unt.edu.
The American Psychological Association, in Washington, D.C., is the first and largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology around the United States. It is also the world's largest association of psychologists. APA's membership is comprised of more than 154,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students. APA works tirelessly to advance psychology as a science, as a profession and as a means of promoting health, education and human welfare.
Comments