Interrogation and Silence: A Comparative Study

This article examines interrogation practices in detail in three systems: the American, the English (and Welsh), and the Canadian while also discussing rules from various other countries. It considers when the Miranda-type warnings (required in all three systems) must be given and when suspects will...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Bradley, Craig M. (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Buch
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: 2009
In:Jahr: 2009
Online-Zugang: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1866312413
003 DE-627
005 20250124054902.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231019s2009 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866312413 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866312413 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Bradley, Craig M.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Interrogation and Silence: A Comparative Study 
264 1 |c 2009 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a This article examines interrogation practices in detail in three systems: the American, the English (and Welsh), and the Canadian while also discussing rules from various other countries. It considers when the Miranda-type warnings (required in all three systems) must be given and when suspects will be deemed to have waived their rights. This article further discusses how reliability and voluntariness of confession is assured. Finally, a particular emphasis is placed on the issue of when a suspect's silence during interrogation may be used against him in court. The article concludes that American courts have not done enough to ensure reliability and voluntariness. In addition, the article further argues that the English approach whereby a suspect is warned that silence during interrogation may be used against him in court, and then it is so used, is fair. The article explains why this approach is not inconsistent with Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1976) which bans such use based on the current Miranda warnings. It suggests that a fifth warning as to use in court be added to the Miranda warnings 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/232668498.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4392956059 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866312413 
LOK |0 005 20231019043637 
LOK |0 008 231019||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE69305755 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw