Where Do Your Miranda Rights Come From? | Miranda v. Arizona

I wrote a new book all about the Supreme Court. Order your copy here: amzn.to/45Wzhur
Patreon: / iammrbeat
Mr. Beat's band: electricneedleroom.us
Mr. Beat on Twitter: / beatmastermatt
In episode 6 of Supreme Court Briefs, you have the right to remain silent. Mr. Beat looks at the origins of the Miranda rights. I'll give you a hint- they are named after a guy named Miranda.
Check out cool primary sources here: www.oyez.org/cases/1965/759
Phoenix, Arizona
March 13, 1963
Police arrest Ernesto Miranda, a suspect linked to the kidnapping and rape of an 18-year old woman ten days earlier. In a police lineup, the victim identified Miranda as the attacker. For two hours, officers aggressively interrogated Miranda about the attack. The officers did not tell Miranda that he did not have to answer the questions, nor did they allow him to call a lawyer. Hmmmm….I guess Miranda didn’t pay attention when his teacher taught him about the Bill of Rights in government class.
Anyway, the officers broke Miranda down, and he confessed to the crime, even signing a statement that described the details of the attack. When this confession was later used in court, of course Miranda was found guilty, even though his lawyer argued that the police pressured him to confess. Miranda was sentenced to up to 30 years of prison.
Miranda appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court, based on the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. You know, the part of the Fifth Amendment that says you cannot be forced to testify against yourself, aka the right to remain silent, and the part of the Sixth Amendment that says you have a right to an attorney. But the Arizona Supreme Court agreed with the lower court.
Welp, Miranda appealed again, and the Supreme Court reviewed the case in June 1966. And this was a tough one. In a 5-4 decision, the Court ruled that Miranda’s confession could not be used as evidence because the officers had denied his 5th and 6th amendment rights. Chief Justice Earl Warren gave the opinion of the Court. Warren brought up that the police done messed up by misleading Miranda and not making it clear to him his rights. Warren said,
“The person in custody must, prior to interrogation, be clearly informed that he has the right to remain silent, and that anything he says will be used against him in court; he must be clearly informed that he has the right to consult with a lawyer and to have the lawyer with him during interrogation, and that, if he is indigent, a lawyer will be appointed to represent him.”
Hmmm, that kind of sounds familiar.
The justices on the Court who disagreed with the majority generally argued that the Constitution didn’t say anything about making a suspect aware about his or her rights. They also argued this gave too much power to suspects and would make police interrogation work much more difficult. They were afraid it might be more difficult to convict criminals.
After the decision, police across the country had to inform suspects of their rights after they arrested them. They became known as the Miranda rights or Miranda warnings. (clip) After the Miranda case, the Court tried to strike a balance between public safety and the rights of the accused. Several later decisions ended up granting exceptions to the Miranda warnings. Some of these exceptions were BIG exceptions, actually.
Still, Miranda v. Arizona has had a huge impact on law enforcement in the United States by empowering those accused of a crime. According to several studies, the decision hasn’t affected detectives’ abilities to solve crime much.
So whatever happened to Ernesto Miranda? Even though the Supreme Court threw out his original trial, he was once again placed on trial in Arizona using different evidence. That evidence? A woman who lived with Miranda during the time of the offense testified that he had confessed to her about committing the crime. In 1967, he was again found guilty and sentenced up to 30 years in prison. However, he was released early due to good behavior, in 1972. Miranda returned to his old neighborhood and made a living autographing what became known as “Miranda cards,” which contained the text of the warning read to suspects. Tragically, he was stabbed to death in a bar fight on January 31, 1976. Police arrested a dude suspected of murdering Miranda. Ironically, that dude, unlike Miranda, exercised his right to remain silent and was later released after there was no evidence to prove he did it.

[@iammrbeat]

My book about everything you need to know about the Supreme Court is now available! Amazon: amzn.to/3Jj3ZnS Bookshop (a collection of indie publishers): bookshop.org/books/the-power-of-and-frustration-with-our-supreme-court-100-supreme-court-cases-you-should-know-about-with-mr-beat/9781684810680 Barnes and Noble: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-matt-beat/1142323504?ean=9781684810680 Amazon UK: www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=the+power+of+our+supreme+court&crid=3R59T7TQ6WKI3&sprefix=the+power+of+our+supreme+courth%2Caps%2C381&ref=nb_sb_noss Mango: mango.bz/books/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-2523-b Target: www.target.com/p/the-power-of-our-supreme-court-by-matt-beat-paperback/-/A-86273023 Walmart: www.walmart.com/ip/The-Power-of-Our-Supreme-Court-How-the-Supreme-Court-Cases-Shape-Democracy-Paperback-9781684810680/688487495 Chapters Indigo: www.chapters.indigo.ca/en-ca/books/the-power-of-our-supreme/9781684810680-item.html?ikwid=The+Power+of+Our+Supreme+Court&ikwsec=Home&ikwidx=0#algoliaQueryId=eab3e89ad34051a62471614d72966b7e

[@simonster-9094]

I was about to say "What convenient naming" but then I realized, the Miranda rights were named after him......

[@iammrbeat]

:D

[@snowvixen1000]

@@iammrbeat I don't know if you take request but I was wondering if you had a video on Gregg v Georgia

[@ms.mojo_risin]

simonster -909 - 😂

[@charahahaundertale._.8837]

simonster -909 hello

[@yaboi7034]

Oofff…

[@cristianvillanueva8782]

omg that ending

[@josestarks8892]

😢😢😢

[@josestarks8892]

Damn! A guy gets away with murdering Miranda by literally using the Miranda defense in court. That's messed up.

[@Stormtrooper-oc4vn]

That's why 4 justices were against it.

[@readynowforever3676]

You just violated his 6th Amendment Rights: The presumption of innocence. He was only suspected of the crime, not convicted of it.

[@elijahfordsidioticvarietys8770]

“There was no evidence that he did it”

[@friedmanism2]

The world is a cold and cruel place.

[@thecurdy]

It's an urban legend and not proven to be true

[@pureroseangemuse7910]

This video is much more better than the website. It make it clearer to understand!

[@iammrbeat]

Thank you! Which website are you referring to?

[@pureroseangemuse7910]

Mr. Beat mostly all, cuz they dont tell the rest of other details on miranda case, i guess watching a video is more descriptive than what i found online.

[@hilman94]

@@iammrbeat by the time you mention "brief" and the image of it appear, I know this video is worth watching 🤣🤣🤣

[@johnthehuman2740]

Dear Mr. Beat, You have a good style of explaining things. The information is not too dense, and you use a conversational tone. Bravo!

[@iammrbeat]

Thank you. That means a lot :D

[@Bcrawlspace]

The purpose of the Miranda rights is to prevent what happened in Duxbury Massachusetts recently. A drunk man drowned in a pond and his son who called 911 to try to save him was arrested and charged with murder. They never read him his Miranda rights and grilled him for 6 hours without his lawyer present. He told his mother afterwards that he did not kill his Dad and that they made him tell the same story a hundred times over so finally he made up a story about exorcizing his father to get rid of a demon so that they would stop badgering him. Already the media ran with the story and it made headlines across the world. I saw an article in a French newspaper. All the articles fail to mention that his confession was the result of a 6 hour interrogation, they play it like that was the son's original response. What the police did amounts to torturing a kid traumatize by the death of his father.

[@nasis18]

Terrible. What was the end result of the case?

[@Bcrawlspace]

@@nasis18 The kid has been sitting in jail for the past two years awaiting trial. The arresting officer took the stand in a pre-trial hearing and stated that he didn't know what the Miranda rights meant, reading them to a prisoner is just part of the job he thought. The judge then threw out the kid's confession to the police. They are still moving forward with the trial which starts in December.

[@nasis18]

@Bcrawlspace Jesus. How the hell did a cop not know what Miranda warnings were?! This is just so messed up. I always say we don't have a justice system. We have a legal system.

[@TheSSUltimateGoku]

Quite surprised that it was 5-4. This was a very important supreme court case.

[@immaheadout4777]

The Supreme Court just completely gutted the Miranda rights. Because now you can’t sue the police for denying you your 5th amendment rights.

[@universalplayz7496]

I mean the 4 judges that dissented had a good cause as there reasoning is true in the part that this isn't stated in the constitution but it can also be argued that one needs to be told his rights when his life and liberty are at stake.

[@DJHardStatic]

You deserve waaaay more attention on YT

[@sophiefrancis8295]

I like how Mr White and Mr. Black voted opposite ways and their names are opposites.

[@Campeon99]

lmaooo i just noticed

[@skotmatthews8940]

Wait a minute, you can be found guilty if ONE person says you confessed to them.. isnt that.. a little dangerous

[@Compucles]

That does seem suspiciously close to hearsay. Although, I'm sure there was also some corroborating evidence that allowed the police to arrest him in the first place.

[@Treblaine]

@@Compucles it literally is hearsay, but, confessions are one of the many exceptions to the hearsay rule. This is also why you should never talk to the police as the hearsay rule does apply to exculpatory statements so if you say "yeah I wanted to kill him but I have an alibi, I was at home sleeping in bed" the only thing the cop can repeat in court is the incriminating "I wanted to kill him"

[@edwardromo7914]

The women who was raped was able to identify Miranda’s car and also testified in court.

[@harry5326]

Shawshank Redemption spoiler alert: The time setting is 1966. When police officers come to arrest guards at the Shawshank prison, the officer making the arrest reads the Miranda rights off a piece of paper. This is because of the fact that SCOTUS had just made a ruling on Miranda. V. Arizona, so the officer doesn't know the rights off by heart yet. Very good detail by the producers of Shawshank Redemption.

[@vampiregamingyt8754]

A missed detail that the film industry doesn't meantion: the Miranda rights don't have to be read upon an arrest, just before an interrogation, and it doesn't imply to things you give up willingly without being asked about.

[@DCJNewsMedia]

This case is far deeper, and has far more emplications than meets the eye. I had to do a 40 hour research paper on it. I went much further by taking to legal minds at various colleges etc. This is by far one of the deepest, widest, and most profound cases of the 1900"s To protect the innocent from cops. Daymond Chief Jones Police Accountability Expert On KZbin 40 peace officer service,

[@rugvedkulkarni1593]

Could you link to that paper?

[@megaaubrezzy]

Yes please link the paper

[@DCJNewsMedia]

@@megaaubrezzy ..I don't have it anymore... that was in college back in 1990.....30 years ago... You can Google Maranda vs. Arizona en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miranda_v._Arizona There are case studies on this specific case.... In my opinion...in the last 20-30 years...many courts have tried to narrow down the meanings of the requirements...... CHIEF JONES

[@PatrioticNurse948]

Could you help clarify something for me regarding it? Maybe im wrong or misinformed but I heard if you request a lawyer, until you get your lawyer present with you, anything you say up until then is nullified? If that makes sense. Basically are there implications that nullify your confession besides _not_ being rrad your rights? Thanks

[@DCJNewsMedia]

@@PatrioticNurse948 ...yes and No... once you Involk your right to remain silent and ask for an attorney...... things are viewed as Duress if police hound you, or scare you into taking... However 🤠 they can claim you revoked your Rights and choose to talk.... Or you just quit talking and never asked for legal counsel..... Then their is a blurted statement called a reas justi..... not sure of spelling....it means you blurted out something that tends to incriminate you before they his chance to Marandize you.... they can use that against you.... In the end it's up to a judge to decide .... your mind set and beliefs and the intention of the Police..... It's a Maze..... just don't talk to police..... even skilled veteran attorneys mess up talking to police......... prison is full of them. Don't be the next mistake...... They are. Giving you legal notice that they believe you committed a crime.... and they are actively building a case against you.... and they are asking or demanding you help them build a case against yourself..... 5th amendment....right not to self incriminate.... Police can lie to get a confession.....case law. But if you lie it's a criminal charge..... you have no right to lie... just cops do. Thank you so very much for the questions

[@AK-tc9xp]

Bro I'm 18 years old and will be taking the Common Law Admissions Test(CLAT) in a few months. I can't wait to get to law school man. Thank you for making these fascinating and informative videos. Hope to be on the Supreme Court of India one day and adjudicate on matters like these.

[@utoothheartyeight]

Did you pick the "man" up from Biden. Quit it, you sound like you're 10 years old in the 1950s.

[@izzatfatima442]

I have already filed case in Pakistan High Court to implement Miranda rights

[@Evogo]

Thank you so much! This video helped so much for my S.S project on Miranda vs. Arizona. I understand everything now, Thank You :))))))))

[@sppsports2449]

Thank you for educating us in an entertaining and informative way, Mr. Beat

[@SWEETCHEEKS1596]

I love the format. Thank you

[@narrowlightbulb]

Great story after he got out of prison, priceless.

[@cassanovana]

Just found this. That was fabulous! You had me informed and laughing so hard. Thanks for that!🤣🤣🤣😁

[@SofiaGonzalez-lj1zn]

GREAT! You make our homework easier! Blessings Mr. Beat.

[@sayakah9014]

Same!

[@maraeanautu6674]

thank you, just what I needed! I love how clearly how you stated everything. It made me understand better than reading.

[@justinmilledge2058]

thanks for this video, it really helped me get a good understanding of the case!

[@iammrbeat]

Glad it helped!

[@redplanet2720]

This one is a certified Supreme Court classic

[@MrRushSkies]

"I wish to remain silent." Kim Jong-un: *"You mean forever?"*

[@Brightness_Radiant]

😂😭

[@oggbogg2]

Wonderful video! Educational. And easy to understand.

[@spaceboy13]

Man I love Columbo. What an amazing show

[@parsaayani9839]

This video needs a grim update in light of the recent sc ruling.

[@throwmilly]

Watching for an assignment and couldn’t stand the voice of the video the professor had us watching., so glad to find this one.

[@jettforpresident3428]

Thank you!

[@iammrbeat]

Thank YOU! :)

[@Amenumenemana8]

3:00am upload. someone had a long night editing.

[@iammrbeat]

I actually uploaded it a few days ago- I scheduled this one. I try to get them all out early on Friday mornings now.

[@RanochVTX]

@@iammrbeat God Dang it Bobby, he was making it look like you work hard.

[@quadsnipershotp1lvl4]

It should be required that all people being interrogated have a lawyer present. And law enforcement can’t fabricate any details in a case

[@sayakah9014]

Thanks for this video it really helped me a lot for my presentation;P

[@iammrbeat]

Glad it helped!

[@jileskorey1105]

Cops: Do you know why I pulled you over? Me: *flashes my miranda card like morty with his adventure card*

[@jessicaballard9521]

Can you do Marbury v. Madison please... Your videos make them much easier to understand... Thank you

[@iammrbeat]

I actually already made a video about that case, back in the day. kzbin.info/www/bejne/o2K5cqCNrdV_oLc However, I do plan on redoing it some time over the next several months. Thanks for the kind words!

[@darlynvillanueva8735]

Thanks for your video

[@coffeecat086]

We were actually made to recite the Miranda right in school… lol wasn’t difficult since I had had to previously learned the preamble to the constitution from memory.

[@siamiam]

well done :D only 5 year served for the 2nd trial O_O

[@iammrbeat]

Thank you! Yeah, that's a little crazy, and even crazier how he died.

[@averagepikfan2686]

Wait, so "You have the right to remain silent" isn't just fancy police talk for "be quiet?"

[@cpi3267]

well... yeah, but cops WANT you to talk

[@DMH-bt2zo]

The last time I heard the Miranda Warning used in a movie or TV show, it was bone-chilling, and it was stranger things.

[@Ugly_German_Truths]

Did those police officers learn their law from a Snapple cap? Even when arrested he is at BEST a suspect, "innocent till proven guilty", yadda yadda yadda... He is NOT a criminal by definition, until he can be demonstrated "beyond reasonable doubt" to have been guilty of such a crime.

[@ashtoncollins868]

Chief Justice: Earl Warren President During this time: Lyndon B. Johnson Argued February 28 - March 1, 1966 Decided June 13, 1966 Case Duration: 105 days Decision: 5-4 in favor of Miranda (Warren, Brennan Jr., Douglas, Fortas, Black. Clark, Stewart, White, Harlan for Arizona)

[@danielnunez1587]

6-3 gutted Miranda

[@ashtoncollins868]

@@danielnunez1587 look at the end of the vid it’s 5-4

[@danielnunez1587]

@@ashtoncollins868 im referencing the supreme courts recent ruling

[@ashtoncollins868]

@@danielnunez1587 wait what did they overturn this or something

[@danielnunez1587]

@@ashtoncollins868 it's a lot to explain over a comment section just google their recent rulings

[@TheNintendoman64]

that sorry dude made me laugh our loud

[@redbinds5336]

There you go. I learnt something new today.

[@michealjacksonsinnocent2488]

Lo these help me so much in school

[@kaijinc3639]

I’m not going to tell you I have subscribed this channel as I have right to remain silent...

[@Hopeof7suns]

LOVE IT!!!

[@nxrvana9828]

Watching this for school.

[@Drakrath]

Wait, isn't that double jeopardy, where you aren't supposed to be tried twice for the same crime? Or does that only come into play when found not guilty. Also do Americans under 18 have Miranda rights?

[@iammrbeat]

Americans under 18 have the Miranda rights yes. And this is an exception to double jeopardy due to different evidence.

[@dontworry1302]

Mr. Beat The exception isn't due to different evidence, when the Supreme Court through out the original case, it would legally be declared a mistrial. A mistrial can be retried again until a conclusive verdict is found.

[@Drakrath]

Mr. Beat and Bernie Sanders thanks for explaining

[@cesardachimp8172]

The right to an attorney is also in the fifth amendment.

[@michwashington]

I subscribed because of this video 👍

[@lizzbethalvarado8823]

does anyone know the interest groups that were in favor and against miranda v. arizona?

[@BlondHairedPeas]

The ending. They need to teach that stuff in school

[@boradmay]

Such a twist

[@noahhanselman7713]

Did you hear that the Miranda Rights may be taken away soon?

[@noahhanselman7713]

@AJ Shaw What about the SCOTUS ruling recently?

[@BadPete81]

Good video.

[@trangwuong7689]

Nice, man.

[@fleetadmiralj]

I mean, on the one hand I get the "if you don't know your own rights, then welp" argument. On the other hand, the logical conclusion to that is something like "the government can censor you unless you are aware and actively assert that they can't" which, yeah, no.

[@101theobserver]

You just added the last part didn’t you?

[@michaelgreen1515]

Odd that this right which has no basis in any British rights is now part of UK law, and that of many other nations.

[@shirtless6934]

Mr. Beat, you do a disservice to the Phoenix Police Department. There is no evidence that they pressured, coerced, or otherwise mistreated Ernest Miranda. As the Supreme Court of Arizona observed,“[t]he voluntariness and the truth of the confession were not denied. However, the defendant did not have an attorney at the time he made the confession. The sole question before the court, then, is whether there was a violation of the rights of defendant under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution by the admission of the voluntary statement made without an attorney.” State v. Miranda, 98 Ariz. 18, 30, 401 P.2d 721, 729 (1965), rev’d, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). Miranda’s case was one of several decided at the same time. There may have been improper police conduct in other cases, but there was none in the Arizona case. If you have any evidence there was, please cite it.

[@Holst_Birgit_Lisa_V3]

Jan 31st 1976 what a good day

[@mummyneo7112]

Mr Beat You should do presidential nominees songs like John Mcain and Mitt Romney that lost

[@iammrbeat]

+Mummy Neo My friend @theworshahts already does actually!

[@coalyboi7939]

WHAT AN ENDING!!!!

[@magsan75ify]

Very interesting

[@brandonk8948]

4:41 ….(starts to sing)…."And isn't ironic? Don't you think?.... IT'S LIKE RAIIIINNN ON A SUNSHINE DAY!...

[@anishsharma7798]

When r u gonna upload the next video?

[@iammrbeat]

+anish sharma Next Friday. I have a song planned for then, and the next SCB episode will be out the following Friday.

[@yaseminakkaya5632]

What is the name of that movie?

[@OpinionesDeJACCsOpinions]

It's a TV show called “Columbo”.

[@freecitymoneyfreecitymoney2050]

In Arizona they don’t even read u your rights any more I’ve been to jail 3 times this year for no injured party. Contact me if you want to sue the city for free city money .

[@mikerizos510]

Contrary to the popular belief, they don't have to inform you of your rights during arrest, only before questioning which can be several hours or days later, if ever. Movies and TV perpetuate the myth.

[@demetriuswalker4052]

why were the rights named after him

[@MrJoosebawkz]

wait how is that not double jeopardy?

[@Native722]

This should also be done for patients rights.

[@brandonguidry1056]

You have the right to... what the hell is that?! I

[@JayeEllis]

Never forget that anything you say CAN and WILL be used AGAINST you. It says nothing about what you say being used in your defense. Nothing you say, even the truth, is to your benefit.

[@OEFvet0311]

Subbed.

[@jettforpresident3428]

If I was a Supreme Court justice, I would have sided with Arizona.

[@JMWall]

may I ask why?

[@AndreRosario-zm8pf]

Attorney up always. Tell the police have a good day and remain Silent. Always Attorney up

[@ahmedalizzy090]

how did they repeat the trial? doesn't that go under double jeopardy or not?

[@raymondluxuryacht86]

Retrying a case because the original conviction was thrown out isn't considered double jeopardy. It's basically considered a do-over because the first trial was deemed invalid. Double jeopardy would only apply if Miranda had been acquitted but then the authorities arrested and tried him again on the same charges.

[@ianlyons7689]

“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 the presence of an attorney before any questioning. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed to you with no cost. “

[@TheAzmountaineer]

Went to pay my respects to Ole Waylon at the City of Mesa Cemetery and discovered Mr Miranda is buried there in the same graveyard.

[@f1scherman]

Wouldn’t the second trial be unconstitutional as that would be considered double jeopardy, considering he was found innocent at the Supreme Court?

[@TheTimoprimo]

No. The Supreme Court just advises the lower courts with their decisions. The lower courts can either choose to start a new trial or to release the person.

[@shirtless6934]

The defendant is deemed to waive the Double Jeopardy defense by taking the appeal.

[@LunaRose1312]

And so it should be hard, if the state wants to deprive you of your freedom then they must have the highest burden of proof, JUSTICE BABY

[@justinNkc]

So the guy that killed Miranda got read his Miranda rights? Thats wholarious!

[@paulcimijotti]

Would his second trial be considered double jeopardy?

[@edwardromo7914]

No. Double jeopardy applies when you’re found not guilty and then charged for the same conduct in the same jurisdiction. In Miranda’s case, he was found guilty, a higher court determined their was evidence the jury shouldn’t have heard, so he was tried again without that evidence.

[@kuyad7131]

The ending be like 😱

[@GLASBE]

While not being the most controversial, this probably is the decision least grounded in reality of the Warren Court and Waren Court-decapitated eras.

[@AntiMasonic93]

The guy that murdered Miranda was mirandized after being placed under arrest interesting.

[@jonathangasana]

58 years ago today

[@flamefusion8963]

You should know your rights. I don't understand why you should need someone to tell you.

[@bobbyferg9173]

Well some people might not have been informed about them. Sure we are trying to make sure that students and immigrants can know their rights as soon as possible but their is always a chance someone never heard them or simply forgot them.

[@sophiefrancis8295]

Some people here aren't American and just wanted to know about the case after watching Elementary.

[@AmazeGames]

awful take

[@ChiliDogzz]

He sounds like Alex Clark

[@theconfederacyofindependen7268]

This is what Officers would tell suspects, and most of the 5th Amendment is about the right to a fair trial ANYWAY.... "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can be used against you in court. You have the right to talk to a lawyer for advice before we ask you any questions. You have the right to have a lawyer with you during questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be appointed for you before any questioning if you wish. If you decide to answer questions now without a lawyer present, you have the right to stop answering at any time."

[@keanndrafrancis3039]

If this is the way you can get them to confess i think it should be legal less people who ate not guilty wouldn't be in jail

[@noesaucedo3700]

Do Padilla vs Kentucky

[@5kilogramsofricin]

Anybody here after SCOTUS essentially gutted the Miranda rights

[@macart5429]

I’m here….Its truly sad and scary to hear it. Roe v. Wade has been overturned.

[@kittykittybangbang9367]

@@macart5429 And they're going after sodomy laws, gay marriage, and contraceptives next

[@macart5429]

@@kittykittybangbang9367 Yes and probably interracial marriage.

[@johnkerry6312]

they didn't need illegal evidence or a confession. they had massive other evidence like the victim's testimony, DNA, lack of alibi, their previous relationship, lack of other suspects, behavior relating to the crime

[@johnkerry6312]

even if he pled guilty to the charges his guilt was beyond a reasonable doubt.

[@johnkerry6312]

his confession to the other person counts as the last one

[@johnkerry6312]

if you don't give an answer to a question under cross examination while picking and choosing, a jury can use that as evidence of guilt. only if you don't speak at all can they not.

[@allyourcode]

How were they allowed to try him again? Constitution says no double jeopardy???

[@TheSSUltimateGoku]

+allyourcode Because he was never found not guilty in the first trial. The conviction was thrown out. However that doesn’t mean that they couldn’t try him again it’s just mean they couldn’t use his confession in the second trial as evidence to find him guilty this time which obviously they didn’t need.

[@birdstudios978]

I Support: Indecisive

[@Anita.Cox.]

Warren and Marshall were definitely the best and most important chief justices

[@soccerandtrack10]

are his miranda rights in jeopardy?

[@dr.altheajones7638]

Explained well... I like ..I like...

[@graysonjustice9731]

not sayin he didnt do it but wouldnt what the room mate said be consiterd hare say and not be viablue in the case