DON'T Listen to LIES about MIRANDA Decision with Retired Deputy Sheriff

Everyone has heard the Miranda warning, even if you have never been arrested or interrogated, TV shows and movies have used it many times.

The phrase “You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can be used against you in court”…. It says used against your, not may help or hurt you. It is a one way street.

There is a two part test weather Miranda is used or not.
The two steps are simple Interrogation and custody.
1- The person being questioned about the case.
2- The suspect being questioned must believe he/she is under arrest and not free to leave. This means that the person being interviewed must believe they are under arrest, whether the person is under arrest or now. The best way to determine this is for the “Suspect” of a case to simply ask if they are under arrest and free to leave. If the answer by the cop is NO then Miranda is necessary, if the answer is they can’t leave, then you have detention and Miranda is necessary.

The case arose out of the interrogation of respondent, Terence Tekoh, by petitioner, Los Angeles County Sheriff ’s Deputy Carlos Vega. Deputy Vega questioned Tekoh at the medical center where Tekoh worked regarding the reported sexual assault of a patient.
Vega did not inform Tekoh of his rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436. Tekoh eventually provided a written statement apologizing for inappropriately touching the patient’s genitals. Tekoh was prosecuted for unlawful sexual penetration.
His written statement was admitted against him at trial. After the jury returned a verdict of not guilty, Tekoh sued Vega under 42 U. S. C. §1983, seeking damages for alleged violations of his constitutional rights.
The Ninth Circuit held that the use of an un-Mirandized statement against a defendant in a criminal proceeding violates the Fifth Amendment and may support a §1983 claim against the officer who obtained the statement.

What are the 3 exceptions to the Miranda rights?
A police officer is not obligated to give the Miranda warnings in these situations: When questioning is necessary for public safety. When asking standard booking questions. When the police have a jailhouse informant talking to the person.

Do they still have to read you your Miranda rights?
Answer: Miranda rights are only required when the police are questioning you in the context of a criminal investigation and hope to or desire to use your statements as evidence against you. Otherwise, Miranda doesn't apply and they're not required to be read.

I absolutely believe in the Miranda Decision, Vega in this case should have kept his mouth shut and not written the confession. It was HIS Choice. He was not being interrogated in a police or sheriff’s station, he was not transported before the confession. Also the statement was eventually not allwed, so it was not used against him and he was found “Not Guilty”
IN CONCUSION, If you are questioned by police for anything, traffic stop, traffic accident, violence, theft or any crime. Use your right to silence EVERY TIME. Don’t incriminate yourself even if you are not in custody. It is to your advantage to hold back and keep your mouth shut.

Contents:
00:00-01:29 Open
01:30-05:07 What is Miranda?
05:08-08:07 LASO Case that was heard
08:08-10:15 Miranda Exceptions
10:16-11:54 Todd's Final Thoughts

[GMPHX]

This also pertains if someone must use deadly force against another person, Do Not say anything to officers except I was in fear for my life!!!! If you call 911 to report someone is entering your home and you are ready to shoot that person Do Not tell the 911 operator that you intend to shoot the person, this then turns into premeditated murder and you can be sure the entire 911 call will be played in court for the As Todd said here, close your mouth until you talk with your attorney, one must be provided if you do not have the means to hire one or have an attorney on retainer!!!! Then after you have consulted the attorney say ONLY what the attorney tells you to say and Nothing Even here in Arizona you must have a fear of serious bodily harm or death Before you can use deadly force, You are NOT required to retreat what so ever. If you do not meet these requirements you will be going to state prison for murder!!!! No matter how nice the police office may seem, he or she has a job to do, and they are not your friend. This includes family members, do not brag and tell them "yea dude I wasted the scumbag, the family member unless it is your spouse may be compelled by the court to testify against You!!!! People have gone to jail for refusing as it is known as contempt of court!!!!

[Daddy]

I was Thinking I was Correct about this Decision and Thankfully you Verified my Thinking. Thanks!!!

[Daddy]

Mr Cotta Sir; Can you do a Video on 18US Codes 241 and 242? I have Tried to get someone to Explain it so I could get a better Understanding of them but No such luck. These Codes CONCERN the TAKING of Rights Under the COLOR of Law.
Respectfully

[groundhog]

Title of this should be:
Don't Believe the Lies By CNN (fill in the blank)

[Jarrodjohn]

Just now made sure to "Like" this video, Subscribe, and briefly leave this comment. Other than that, Imma shut the hell up!

[ryanhathaway]

1.cops did not have to go around mirandizing everyone they talked to before vega vs. tekoh. 2. you can be detained anywhere, i dont see why the fact they were at tekoh's place of work is relevant. if im being interviewed by the police, im going to assume im not free to leave, even if im being interviewed on my own property. 3. "youve heard miranda enough on television..." so what? ive heard enough miranda on television that you shouldnt have to mirandize anyone anymore? i thought you said miranda wasnt going anywhere? i thought you said you "believe in miranda", i guess you only believe in miranda for people who "watch enough television". what about children, who havent seen as much tv? do kids in school even watch shows like law and order? will there even be miranda warnings on tv after police are no longer obligated to mirandize people? what will you say about miranda warnings in 10 years, when they arent on tv anymore? 4. if the police cant be held civilly liable anymore, than what is the point of 42 usc 1983? we have a right under federal law to sue police when our rights are violated. this is another example of the supreme court legislating from the bench, just like qualified immunity. if it means that much to you, than codify it into law and stop legislating from the bench. scotus are not lawmakers.5. the very presence of police officers is intimidating enough to compel a reasonable person to provide a statement when they dont have to. are you just finding it difficult to trick children, foreigners, and the mentally challenged into incriminating themselves with impunity? in conclusion, i hope you enjoy first ammendment auditor's cameras in your face, because as long as you come after our rights like this, we will never believe that you exist to "protect and serve".