Reasoning of the Court

Reasoning of the Court
The reasoning of the justices who voted for Miranda considered his side of the case to be a violation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Justice CJ Warren: “Warnings are a judicial prophylactic to protect the fundamental right against compelled self-incrimination because of the oppressive nature of station house questioning. This case does not hamper police officers in investigating crime because general on-the-scene questioning is not affected. Conviction reversed” (http://www.4lawschool.com/criminal/miranda.htm). He states that if a person is taken into custody or deprived of any of his or her freedoms, he or she must be warned that they have a right to remain silent, and anything they say can be used against them in the court of law. “No evidence obtained as a result of interrogation can be used against a person unless the prosecution has shown that the person had been informed of his rights. If a person indicates a desire to remain silent or have an attorney present at any time during questioning, the interrogation must cease or cease until an attorney is present” (http://www.4lawschool.com/criminal/miranda.htm). If the suspect has been warned, he or she may knowingly waive his or her rights and make statements and answer questions without counsel.