Surely this isn't accurate, right? Like, I can't find anything other than this Hill op-ed that says Miranda rights are under threat, and it seems like a really bizarre thing to go after.
i mean it's not that weird. the courts are of course pro-cop and having to rule that a defendant's rights were violated because of Miranda is a thorn in their side.
Surely this isn't accurate, right? Like, I can't find anything other than this Hill op-ed that says Miranda rights are under threat, and it seems like a really bizarre thing to go after.
i mean it's not that weird. the courts are of course pro-cop and having to rule that a defendant's rights were violated because of Miranda is a thorn in their side.