In any form of criminal trial, a confession from the defendant is often considered as compelling evidence. However, there are laws which govern how police officers proceed while obtaining confessions or information from suspects. Miranda rights are expected to be read to the defendant prior to any form of interrogation. According to Goldstein and Oberlander (2001, p.454) Miranda rights which were derived from the Miranda vs. Arizona case of 1966 seeks to inform suspects of their constitutional rights.
These rights warn them against self incrimination and inform them of their rights to having an attorney present during any interrogations. Since suspects have been given the right to remain silent, it is up to them to either waiver the Miranda rights or not. At a time when any suspect chooses not to waiver the Miranda rights, they place a hurdle in any ongoing investigations. This is because these rights restrict them of giving out information which may incriminate them and as earlier observed without this information prosecution becomes problematic. This paper seeks to argue that Miranda rights are exceptionally problematic when handling domestic terrorists. Domestic terrorists should not be accorded these rights as they will hinder the war against terrorism.
These are just excerpts of essays for you to view. Please click on Order Now for custom essays, research papers, term papers, thesis, dissertations, case studies and book reports.