Reference no: EM131858034

Someone please need help on my introduction (criminal justice) if there's something missing feel free to put it

In 1966 (Arizona V. Miranda) the Miranda warning was established after Ernesto Miranda was convicted of kidnapping and rape in 1963. When he was arrested, the law enforcement did not mention the Miranda warning before he confessed and even had an attorney present during interrogation. During the trial, the prosecutor used his confession as evidence in court, and he was sentenced to 20-30 years in prison. Later his sentence changed to 11 years in prison. In 1966 the Supreme Court indicated that Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 was a violation of the constitution of the 5^th amendment (due process law) and 6^th amendment (the right to counsel). Stearns (Monday 24, 2016) mentioned that a person's rights should not be violated under the constitutional Bill of Rights. Miranda warning procedure should be followed regardless of any circumstances. There're opposing and supporting viewpoints of whether terrorists should be treated fairly and equally in the court of law and be given the Miranda Warning before interrogation. In the recent years, they have been evidence to show both opposing and supporting sides which have influenced terrorism in the United States. Factors such as the use of the amendment, torturing techniques, and the use of Miranda Warning can have an effect on terrorism to the nation. As of today, the Miranda warning has been debated if it should be accessed by suspected terrorists.