6

Miranda Rights Protected Citizens from Police Officers — Those Days Are Over

 2 years ago
source link: https://medium.com/afrosapiophile/miranda-rights-protected-citizens-from-police-officers-those-days-are-over-fe42ae93a74e
Go to the source link to view the article. You can view the picture content, updated content and better typesetting reading experience. If the link is broken, please click the button below to view the snapshot at that time.
neoserver,ios ssh client

CIVIL RIGHTS SHOULD MATTER

Miranda Rights Protected Citizens from Police Officers — Those Days Are Over

The Supreme Court ruled in Vega vs. Tekoh that citizens cannot sue police officers for refusing to read their rights.

0*pI6QIt3G47A5YbZh
Photo by ev on Unsplash

In 1966, The Supreme Court’s Miranda v. Arizona decision established the principle that “criminal suspects must be advised of their rights before interrogation.” Based on this precedent, when an officer decides to arrest someone they suspect of committing a crime, they Mirandize them by reading a simple script: “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me?”

People often feel pressured to answer questions that officers ask or explain their behavior upon request. Police are armed and, unfortunately, have wide-sweeping authority to shoot citizens without consequence, as we’ve seen over the years. Black Americans are the most likely to die during interactions with police, even when they are unarmed. Given the power that officers have, many Black people feel they have no choice but to “cooperate.” And if you interrogate someone long enough, using the right tactics, you can get them to say almost anything. Miranda v. Arizona was a groundbreaking decision, and the Supreme Court’s efforts to dismantle the protections established under this precedent weakened all Americans’ civil rights.

In the Central Park Five case, for example, officers coaxed false confessions out of five innocent Black adolescents accused of raping a White woman. They failed to read their rights, and as teenagers, the boys were unaware they were due this right. In 1989, Trump took out a full-page ad advocating bringing back the death penalty, especially for them and refused to apologize even after DNA evidence exonerated them. So, when an officer with the power of life and death in their hands asks you a question, it becomes difficult to remain silent.

However, once someone hears an officer read the Miranda warning, they will undoubtedly become more aware of their circumstances and understand that their conversation with the officer is not casual. On the contrary, the goal of an officer speaking to a suspect is to acquire the information they could use in a criminal trial against the defendant. Police worry that people will be less likely to speak with them freely if they are reminded that anything they say can and will be used against them in a court of law. However, it’s only fair to warn citizens, especially since public schools do not teach legal precedent — many Americans do not know their rights. Taking advantage of citizens’ lack of understanding of the criminal justice system is despicable, to say the least.

Today, in a 6–3 decision, the Supreme Court sided with the officer in Vega v. Tekoh. Based on their ruling, citizens no longer have the right to sue an officer who fails to read the Miranda warning. So, at this point, we shouldn’t ask the court how low will they go — there is no bottom. When a patient accused Terrence Tekoh, a healthcare professional, of sexual assault, the officer failed to advise him of his Miranda rights “prior to questioning him or taking his statement.” At trial, a trial found Tekhoh innocent.

After his trial, Tekoh sued the officer, Vega “under 42 USC § 1983, alleging that Vega violated Tekoh’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination by taking his statement without first advising him of his Miranda rights.” Sadly, the Supreme Court justices disagreed, again lowering the standard for policing for officers around the country. Since there were no consequences for the officer who failed to inform Tekoh of his rights, the Supreme Court’s decision effectively guts protections established in Miranda v. Arizona. Justices with lifelong appointments are throwing out legal precedent with the bathwater.

Now, this week, you will hear a lot about the court’s decision on guns. In another 6–3 decision, the Supreme Court determined that the “Constitution protects the right to carry a gun outside the home.” Their decision will upend legislation in states like New York, which tried to address gun violence locally. And while you will hear a lot about that case and its impact, you’re unlikely to hear much about Vega v. Tekoh because of who this case impacts. Officers no longer having to warn citizens about their right to counsel weakens our democracy and makes us less like traditional democratic citizens and more like subjects.

We also shouldn’t forget about people with developmental or cognitive disabilities, who may not understand their rights even when officers read them out loud. What will happen when they do not know what’s happening or understand they have the right to counsel? As it stands, the Supreme Court seems hell-bent on sending us back. All the hard work of civil rights leaders, activists, and Americans who believe in equality is being unraveled before our very eyes. And without court reform, it seems we’re powerless to stop them.

🌹Learn more about the author here.
🖊Sign up to read all my stories and thousands more.


report

Recommend

About Joyk


Aggregate valuable and interesting links.
Joyk means Joy of geeK