Check out some similar questions!

lillian1955 · May 28, 2010, 10:14 AM

I was arested for domestic and dui did'nt case's but on both I was not told my rights about being slient. I even asked for a lawyer but I was told I was'nt under arrest so I did not need one then they laughed. I blew once but the cop instised on taking me to police station to blow again I refused,then he took me to hospital for blood I refused then he took be back to jail and wanted me to blow I refused then he put me in loock up. Several hr's later they booked me finger prints,pee cup and locked me up until court they never read me my rights. I hve 3 things that happened since jan and feb and no one read me my rights.and I had to pleed guilty 2 both or they would not let me out until I went to court that would be 2 month's I would have to stay in jail and I pleaded not guilty but again they wanted to get both of the books so I had to plee to probation and clases and I was not guilty I had proof picyures, bruises all over me and thy let my husband go because he had 2 scraches on his face.no he wish he retracked his lies can I file civil law suit and kept me to long also spent 15 day's also in jail

JudyKayTee · May 28, 2010, 10:24 AM

Yes, you can bring an action against the County or City if you were not read your rights but were put in jail without cause.

I find it difficult to believe that you have been arrested three times (if that is what you are saying) and have never been read your rights.

excon · May 28, 2010, 01:09 PM

Hello l:

The only reason they are required to read your Miranda rights to you, is if they intend to question you and USE what you say in court. But, if they don't need your statement to convict you, they don't have to read you your rights.

excon

ballengerb1 · May 28, 2010, 01:19 PM

Excon is correct, police can decline to read you the Miranda rights under certain circumstances. I wonder why you are writing to us, do you not have a lawyer or Public Defender. Let's also keep in mind that Miranda was actually later convicted, served time and then was killing in a barrom fight. An apparent slow learner.

JudyKayTee · May 28, 2010, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by ballengerb1

excon is correct, police can decline to read you the Miranda rights under certain circumstances. I wonder why you are writing to us, do you not have a lawyer or Public Defender. Let's also keep in mind that Miranda was actually later convicted, served time and then was killing in a barrom fight. An apparent slow learner.

I didn't know this! I learn something every day! Out of greenies - so here are some stars **********

(Bar room fight, you say?)

twinkiedooter · May 29, 2010, 05:10 PM

JKT only if the cops wish to question a suspect of a crime do they HAVE to read the Miranda. Just because someone is arrested and taken to jail and booked into the jail does NOT qualify them for their Miranda being read to them. Strange, but true, but that's the way it works.

It only pertains to the questioning of the suspect. If you actually read the words of the Miranda itself you will see where it says that the person can remain silent if they so desire.

ballengerb1 · May 30, 2010, 09:17 AM

It is what's called the smoking gun or prima fascia, they do not need the suspects comments to arrest

JudyKayTee · May 30, 2010, 09:58 AM

Hmm - I "do" almost no criminal law. I know when I was with US Customs we ready EVERYBODY their Miranda rights (including each other during lunch breaks, but that's another story). I thought it covered law enforcement in case the "suspect" at some time simply decided to blurt out the truth. Maybe not.

The DUI doesn't surprise me; the domestic violence does.

If I'm ever arrested I'm calling Twinkie first, then Ballenger, then Excon.

Thanks for the info!

ballengerb1 · May 31, 2010, 06:13 PM

If they don't Mirandize you and you blurt out the truth they just can't use it. We used to joke about keeping a can of beer in the car in case you get stopped. Once stopped you open and chug the beer in front of the officier as he walks up. Guess what happens.

ScottGem · May 31, 2010, 06:29 PM

The Miranda decision was based on the 5th amendment right against self incrimination. If you werenot "mirandized" all it means is that theyt can't used aything you say against you in court.

If they have witnesses to provethe DV and they have other evidence to prove the DUI, then they don't need any statements from you so not being "mirandized" has no effect.

As for "forcing" you to plead guilty, that's BS. You can only plead guilty in court and you can't offer a plea in court without counsel.

Fr_Chuck · May 31, 2010, 07:56 PM

First you were arrested for the DUI because you refused to take the tests, most states have an applied consent law, where you are assumed quilty ifyou refuse the test, that is why they give you a chance at blow test, blood test and another blow test, theyshow they gave you every chance to have your right to a test but refused.

They are not required to read you your rights, ( that is TV and Judge Judy law) in real life the arresting officer seldon reads you your right, unless they place you under arrest and are going to question you. Most questions happen in custody by dect. Latter.

In your case, if they ever questioned you, they had no need to read you any rights. They may just not use what you said against you.

Also while you were still being asked to blow or asked for a blood test you were in custody. Next you have no right to an attorney at the blow or blood test, only at questioning.
So your request for an attorney was funny, if they were not going to question you and most likely because you were drunk doing it.

And no you don't have to "plead guilty" you can bail out if you can afford bail.