Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
E202: The Crime Behind the Miranda Warning
3.6k Plays1 year ago
We’ve all heard of our Miranda Rights. Some of us know that they originated as the result of a 1966 Supreme Court decision in the Miranda v. Arizona case. But few of us know the details of Miranda’s crime. Join Allison as she explores the case, as well as the controversy in that Supreme Court ruling.
Please consider supporting the pod by joining us over on our Patreon page! Are you up-to-date on all our regular content? Get access to monthly mini-episodes as well as one full solved case per month by joining today! Be a part of the C & C Fam by going to https://www.patreon.com/coffeeandcases to register!
BlendJet Offer: Use my special link (https://zen.ai/coffeeandcasesblendpromo) to save 12% at blendjet.com. The discount will be applied at checkout!
Motley Fool Offer: Save $110* off the full list price of Stock Advisor for your first year, go to fool.com/coffeeandcases and use promo code coffeeandcases and start your investing journey today! *$110 discount off of $199 per year list price.Membership will renew annually at the then current list price.
Cure Hydration: Try Cure today and feel the difference for yourself! Use my special link (https://zen.ai/coffeeandcasespod20) for 20% off your order, coupon activated at checkout!
Nom Nom: Try Nom Nom today; go to https://trynom.com/coffeeandcases and get 50% off your first order plus free shipping
Recommended
Transcript
The Challenge of Learning New Topics
00:00:00
Speaker
Life is a learning process. I am, all of the time, met with topics for which I feel wholly ignorant. In other scenarios, I might know the basics of a topic, but definitely not enough to feel like my opinion is thoroughly and sufficiently supported.
Origins of the Miranda Warning
00:00:20
Speaker
And the origin of the Miranda warning
00:00:23
Speaker
The case from which that warning sprung, at least, was one for which I will admit I was completely ignorant until my research and discussions that I've conducted this past week.
00:00:38
Speaker
The warning itself is commonplace enough. We hear it in nearly every police show and crime movie. Especially for those of us intrigued by the true crime world, we can probably even likely recite it by heart. You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.
00:01:00
Speaker
You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak with me? The Miranda Warning is often also referred to as being read your Miranda rights as they outline your constitutional fifth and sixth amendment rights to ensure you understand them.
00:01:27
Speaker
If you invoke your Miranda rights, then that means you've either chosen to remain silent or you have requested an attorney and either way the interrogation must cease.
Interview Preview: George Culber on Miranda's Victim
00:01:40
Speaker
And these are the results of a Supreme Court decision in 1966 in the Miranda v. Arizona case.
00:01:50
Speaker
What I didn't know was what Ernesto Miranda's crimes actually were and what had landed his case in the Supreme Court. Tomorrow, I'll be posting an interview with George Culber, writer and producer of the film Miranda's Victim that airs in select theaters and on video on demand tomorrow, October 6th, 2023.
00:02:17
Speaker
The lack of knowledge I had about the crime, well, I wasn't alone. Colbert made this realization and knew that that was a story that needed to be told. And it is one expertly presented in the film.
00:02:35
Speaker
as a precursor to that interview and to hopefully your own viewing of this very important film. In this week's episode, I wanted to give you some of that historical background information about that crime.
Introducing Coffee and Cases Podcast
00:02:50
Speaker
This is the crime behind the Miranda Warning.
00:03:08
Speaker
So.
00:03:29
Speaker
Welcome to Coffee and Cases where we like our coffee hot and our cases cold. My name is Allison Williams. And my name is Maggie Dameron. We will be telling stories each week in the hopes that someone out there with any information concerning the cases will take those tips to law enforcement. So justice and closure can be brought to these families.
00:03:48
Speaker
With each case, we encourage you to continue in the conversation on our Facebook page, Coffee and Cases podcast, because as we all know, conversation helps to keep the missing person in the public consciousness, helping keep their memories alive. So sit back, sip your coffee, and listen to what's brewing this
Trigger Warning: Trish Weir's Assault
00:04:05
Speaker
week. Before we begin this episode, I wanted to provide a trigger warning. We will be extensively discussing sexual assault in this episode, so listener discretion is advised.
00:04:19
Speaker
An 18-year-old girl in Phoenix, Arizona had been working late at the movie theater where she was employed. All went well on her shift that evening, and she caught the bus home like normal. As she was walking home from her stop, a man jumped from his car, grabbed the girl, held a knife to her throat, and drug her into the back seat of his car, where he tied her hands behind her back,
00:04:47
Speaker
tied her ankles together and demanded that she lie down in the backseat as he drove away. He drove for about 20 minutes away from the city and into the Arizona desert. Here he finally stopped, climbed into the backseat and began removing her clothes. She pleaded with him, please don't and please let me go. Instead, he raped her.
00:05:18
Speaker
After assaulting her, he demanded to be given all the money she had, and he again demanded that she lie down in the backseat. He then proceeded to drive her back to the location from which he had abducted her, mere blocks from her home and safety. As he pulled her into the street, he said, pray for me, and drove off.
00:05:47
Speaker
The girl's name was Trish Weir, or at least that is the pseudonym we have given her because not at the time of the crime nor in all the years since has her name been made public. So from here on out, I will refer to her as Trish. I want you to keep in mind the climate of the early 1960s.
00:06:10
Speaker
This was not a time during which a woman could easily come forward to say that she had been raped because of all of the social stigma associated with premarital sex and purity. To come out about what happened and to take that information to the police was both a bold act and a brave one.
Trish Weir Reports the Crime
00:06:32
Speaker
But that's precisely what Trish did.
00:06:37
Speaker
Trish was given a polygraph test, but the results were inconclusive. Luckily, the police believed her. Trish was, of course, traumatized by what had happened, and as a result, some of her recollections came out in pieces.
00:06:54
Speaker
Also, as she was a virgin, when initially asked with what the attacker had penetrated her, she was unsure if it had been a finger or his penis. This point would later be brought up in trial in an attempt to discredit her testimony. As for the perpetrator,
00:07:15
Speaker
She remembered small bits of his appearance, but it was dark. He had a knife, and as far as she was likely concerned, and I'm projecting my own opinion here, she likely thought he was taking her somewhere to murder her. She recalled dark hair and glasses.
00:07:36
Speaker
She did remember some details of the car. She remembered that it had either been green or gray and that the interior was a dark color with stripes. Despite the trauma of what had happened, life continued.
00:07:53
Speaker
However, only a few days after having gone to the police to file a report, Trish and one of her cousins noticed a car slowly creeping the streets in her neighborhood right by the bus stop from which she had been taken. This time, the two were able to get a partial plate on what the cousin believed to be a 1953 Packard that they were able to share with police.
00:08:19
Speaker
one of those police officers was Captain Carol Cooley.
Ernesto Miranda's Background
00:08:24
Speaker
That partial plate was linked to that 53 Packard, just as the cousin had believed it to be. And it belonged to a 29 year old woman named Twyla Hoffman. Police decided to follow the lead. When they arrived at the home, Ms. Hoffman answered the door, child on her hip.
00:08:47
Speaker
asked about the vehicle, she stated that it was her car, but that her living boyfriend, Ernie Miranda, also drove it. Police asked to speak with Miranda, and when he came to the door, told him that it would be better not to speak about the matter in front of his girlfriend and children, that a better place for the discussion would be the police station. Miranda agreed and went with them.
00:09:16
Speaker
According to an interview with Captain Cooley from as recently as 2022, he recalled the following, quote, on the way he asked, what's this all about? And we said, I said, let's just wait until we get to the department and we'll tell you all about it, end quote.
00:09:35
Speaker
Ernesto Miranda called Ernie as a youth and by those closest to him was 24 years old in 1963 when this case takes place. He was a high school dropout with an eighth grade education. And when taken to the station, police were soon aware of his rather lengthy criminal history. Miranda lost his mother at a young age. He was only five or six and he didn't get along with his father nor his stepmother.
00:10:05
Speaker
Just after dropping out of school was when Miranda's criminal history began. And after being convicted of burglary, he was sent to reform school. But he was soon arrested again on charges of assault and on charges of attempted rape, and again sent to reform school. After two years, now 17, he was a suspect in an armed robbery case and had charges of being a peeping Tom.
00:10:33
Speaker
At 18, Miranda enlisted in the army, but was dishonorably discharged after only 15 months for going AWOL and again, peeping. Then he spent time in jail for stealing a car. This was all before moving to Arizona in 1963 and appearing to be just an average guy with a family and a good job at a loading dock. That is until March 13th, 1963.
Miranda's Confession and Initial Conviction
00:11:02
Speaker
when he was a suspect in the armed robbery of a bank worker. It was on those charges as well the police wanted to question him. Miranda initially proclaimed his innocence but agreed to be put in a lineup. Miranda was put in a lineup with three other men. He was the only man in the lineup wearing glasses.
00:11:25
Speaker
According to my research, despite being the only one wearing glasses, Trish didn't immediately identify her attacker. You see, trauma can make you doubt and it can cloud your memory. After the lineup process, though, when Captain Carol Cooley came into the room where Miranda was waiting, Miranda asked Cooley how he had done. Cooley told Miranda, not too good, Ernie.
00:11:53
Speaker
According to that 2022 interview with Cooley, quote, he said, well, I guess I better tell you all about it then. I said, yes, I think you should end quote. What followed was two hours worth of questioning.
00:12:11
Speaker
Despite the fact that at the time it wasn't uncommon for police to literally throw the book at you and give you the third degree, implying rough treatment to get the information that they were after, the officers in this case did nothing of the sort.
00:12:27
Speaker
Instead, Miranda admitted to the officers, too, were in the room, what he had done and the details he provided matched details given to them by Trish in her description of what she had gone through, including that he, quote, grabbed her by the arm and, quote, tied her hands and ankles, end quote. Miranda even specified that he had only been able to penetrate the girl about half an inch.
00:12:57
Speaker
and related that she had told him that she was a virgin. At one point, Trish was even brought into the interrogation room to stand before Miranda. One of the officers asked Miranda to look at her and say whether this was the young woman he had raped. Upon glancing at Trish, he stated, that's the girl.
00:13:21
Speaker
The officers asked Miranda that he put his confession in writing and handed him a paper with a typed statement at the top reading, quote, this confession was made with full knowledge of my legal rights. Understanding any statement I make may be used against me. End quote. Miranda proceeded to then write out the details of his oral confession, but this time in his own handwriting.
00:13:51
Speaker
The next day, March 14th, Miranda was charged with failure to register as an ex-convict and sentenced to 10 days in the county jail. Before he was let out, Miranda was additionally charged with robbery, kidnap, and rape. It was then he was appointed an attorney. With that written confession and with testimony, Ernesto Miranda was convicted in an Arizona court
00:14:20
Speaker
and sentenced to 20 to 30 years for his crimes. However, only six months after the conviction, Miranda's attorney appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court.
Appeal of Miranda's Conviction
00:14:32
Speaker
He argued that the confession should be inadmissible because his lawyer posited, was the statement made voluntarily?
00:14:41
Speaker
He also asked whether his client, Miranda, had been, quote, afforded all the safeguards to his rights provided by the Constitution of the United States, end quote. In other words, Miranda's lawyer was asking, was he aware of his right to remain silent? Was he made aware of his right to have legal representation throughout this process? Miranda's lawyers argued no.
00:15:08
Speaker
They argued that due in part to his education, he was not explicitly aware of his constitutional rights and that as a result, his confession obtained without that full understanding should be inadmissible. The Arizona Supreme Court believed otherwise when they heard the case in April 1965 and upheld
00:15:32
Speaker
Miranda's previous conviction. And I feel the need to note here that at the time, Arizona law did not require that police inform suspects of their right to an attorney. It was at this moment that the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU, got involved and brought in their own lawyer, John H. Flynn, a constitutional expert, to take over Miranda's case.
00:16:01
Speaker
Flynn took the case to the United States Supreme Court where it was heard in 1966. When the case was presented to the Supreme Court with Chief Justice Earl Warren presiding, Flynn argued first that Miranda's confession had been coerced, as illustrated in the following statement.
00:16:23
Speaker
Now the critical aspect of the defendant's case, confession, I think is eminently demonstrated when during the trial the prosecutor was asked the question concerning penetration in which she first responded that she thought it was by finger under questioning by the prosecuting attorney.
00:16:43
Speaker
Immediately thereafter, she expressed uncertainty as to the manner or method of penetration, and after some prompting, responded to the prosecuting attorney that it had been, in fact, by the male organ.
00:16:58
Speaker
On cross-examination, she again expressed the uncertainty in relation to this penetration, which, of course, is the essential element of the crime of first-degree rape in the state of Arizona when she did responded to his questions that she simply was unsure whether it had been by finger or by penis.
00:17:19
Speaker
Now, of course, the defendant's confession neatly corrects this reasonable doubt that otherwise would have been engendered. When in precise terminology, he wrote, quote, asked her to lie down and she did. Could not get penis into vagina. Got about one half, half written, inch in, end quote.
00:17:41
Speaker
The only thing missing or the only thing this officer's failed to supply in words to this defendant at the time he wrote his confession was in violation of Section 13-611 Arizona revised statutes." End quote.
00:18:01
Speaker
My daughter and I love smoothies, but what we don't love are smoothie bar prices. With our Blendjet 2 portable blender, we can make smoothie bar quality drinks for a fraction of the price. Blendjet 2 is portable, so you can blend up a smoothie at work, a protein shake at the gym, or even a margarita on the beach. And it's small enough to fit into a cup holder, but powerful enough to blast through tough ingredients like ice and frozen fruit with ease.
00:18:27
Speaker
Even better blingit to his whisper quiet, so you can make your morning smoothie without waking up the whole House, plus it lasts for 15 plus blends and recharges quickly via usbc. You guys have heard me say it before and i'll say it again. Best of all the blingit to cleans itself just blend water with a drop of soap and you're good to go, plus they have so many trendy colors to choose from the hardest choice will be which design you want to rock.
00:18:55
Speaker
We also want to introduce you to the Orbiter Drinking Lid. The Orbiter Drinking Lid balances a leak proof design with one hand use convenience and a modern minimalist design. The Orbiter Drinking Lid is so easy to use you only need one hand. BlendJet's patent pending design allows you to open and drink by simply rotating the lid with your thumb. Just when we thought the BlendJet 2 couldn't get any better, it did.
00:19:19
Speaker
Now you can blend anywhere without spilling everywhere. So what are you waiting for? Go to blendjet.com and grab yours today. And be sure to use the promo code coffeeandcasesblendjet to get 12% off your order and free two-day shipping. No other portable blender on the market comes close to the quality, power, and innovation of the BlendJet 2. They guarantee you'll love it or your money back.
00:19:44
Speaker
Blend anytime, anywhere with a BlendJet 2 portable blender. Go to blendjet.com and use the code COFFEEINCASESBLENDJET to get 12% off your order and free two-day shipping. Shop today and get the best deal ever.
00:20:00
Speaker
I don't know if it's been the same for you, but it feels like the price of everything keeps rising and my bank account keeps shrinking. Even when I had money passively sitting in investment accounts, those funds rarely rise at the rate of inflation, leaving me feeling like I was in the same boat. All of my money was going somewhere, but never coming back to me.
00:20:18
Speaker
The age of stock picking is here with towering inflation and elevating interest rates. Sticking your money in a passive market fund just isn't going to get you what it used to. But it doesn't mean you have to abandon the market. There are still ways to invest for the future. You just need to know where to look, which is where the Motley Fool comes in. The Motley Fool Stock Advisor Service highlights two stocks each and every month for members to add to their portfolios. And it literally has paid to listen to them.
00:20:46
Speaker
Historically, their average stock recommendation is up over 400% as of April 10, 2023. And listeners of Coffee and Cases can now access Motley Fool Stock Advisor for just $89 for their first year. That's a full $110 off the list price. What are you waiting for? Visit fool.com forward slash coffee and cases to start your investing journey today.
00:21:13
Speaker
Did you know that dehydration is the leading cause of daytime fatigue? I was shocked to learn that even mild dehydration can cause headaches, muscle weakness, and brain fog. But luckily, there's a solution. Cure. Cure believes that hydration should be simple and effective, but also clean and natural. That's why they use only the highest quality plant-based ingredients and avoid any artificial or harmful additives.
00:21:37
Speaker
They're committed to transparency and honesty. All of their ingredients are clearly listed on their website and packaging, and they're always happy to answer any questions or concerns. Ready to combat dehydration? Track your today and feel the difference for yourself. Use code COFFEEINCASES for 20% off your order.
00:22:00
Speaker
After Flynn's argument that Miranda's confession had been coerced, the justices then turned their attention to the wording of the Fifth Amendment, which reads in part that no person, quote, shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, end quote.
Supreme Court's Examination of Compelled Confession
00:22:18
Speaker
The justices honed in on the word compelled and where that line should be drawn.
00:22:25
Speaker
Obviously, the use of physical threats or violence could compel self-incrimination. But could it also be considered that one is compelled if one confesses just because they were unaware of their right to remain silent? Miranda's lawyer argues that it was. Again, here is part of Flynn's argument that he made to the court.
00:22:49
Speaker
Justice Stewart, is there any claim in this case that this confession was compelled was involuntary? Flynn, know your honor. Justice Stewart, none at all. Flynn, none at all. Justice White, do you mean that there's no question that he was not compelled to give evidence against himself? Flynn,
00:23:13
Speaker
We have not raised question that he was compelled to give this statement in the sense that anyone forced him to do it by coercion, by threats, by promises, or compulsion of that kind. Justice White, of that kind? Was it voluntary or wasn't it? Flynn, well, voluntary in the sense that the man at a time without knowledge of his rights
00:23:36
Speaker
Justice White, do you claim his Fifth Amendment rights were violated? Flynn, I would say his Fifth Amendment right was violated to the extent, Justice White, so he was compelled to do it. That's what the amendment says. Flynn, yes, to the extent that he was, number one, too poor to exercise it. Number two, mentally abnormal. Justice White, whatever the Fifth said, you say he was compelled to do it.
00:24:04
Speaker
Flynn. I say it was taken from him at a point in time when he absolutely should have been afforded the Sixth Amendment. Justice White. I'm not talking about violating the amendment, namely the term. This provision that he was to violate the amendment is the Fifth Amendment right. He has to be compelled to do it, doesn't he? Flynn.
00:24:27
Speaker
In the sense that your honor is presenting to me the word compelled, you're correct. Justice White, well, I was talking what the Constitution says. Justice Black, he doesn't have to have a gun pointed to his head, does he? Justice White, of course he does. So he was compelled to do it, wasn't he, according to your claim?
00:24:47
Speaker
Flynn, not by gunpoint, as Mr. Justice Black has indicated, he was called upon to surrender a right that he didn't fully realize and appreciate that he had. It was taken from him.
00:24:59
Speaker
Justice White, I'm trying to find out if he claimed his Fifth Amendment rights were being violated, and if they were, he must be compelled. You say compelled to do it under all the circumstances. Flynn, I would say that as a result of lack of knowledge, or for lack of a better term, failure to advise the denial of the right to counsel, staged in a proceeding when he most certainly needed it,
00:25:27
Speaker
that this could in and of itself, and certainly in most police interrogations, constitute compulsion. Now listeners, before we continue, let me kind of break this down. In essence, we have Miranda who made a confession without
00:25:48
Speaker
coercion in the sense of physical threats or violence or promises or anything like that. The details he provided matched what Trish had provided. He had been found guilty in Arizona courts and continuing in the Arizona Supreme Court. His guilt in terms of the crime is not what the Supreme Court were debating. I understand that it's hard to separate the two and to me it feels
00:26:19
Speaker
Icky to think that someone who committed a crime would be the face for individual rights as he is in the Supreme Court case. What they are trying to debate, however, is number one, whether Miranda had been coerced into his confession. There was no commentary from the Supreme Court on that.
00:26:47
Speaker
The second part of Flynn's claim for his client Miranda is that one must not be compelled to incriminate themselves in a crime. And he's trying to argue that because Miranda was unaware of his full rights provided him by the Constitution, that that in and of itself would fit the definition of compulsion.
00:27:16
Speaker
Now, it bears noting, as colleague and friend of mine who teaches classes in US government, as well as criminal law and justice, Lauren Vassar did to me, that other decisions in Warren's court included Brown v. Board of Education, in which the justices were unanimous in desegregating public schools, and Gideon v. Wainwright, in which, again, the justices were unanimous
00:27:43
Speaker
in their favor of Gideon and guaranteeing the right to legal counsel. In Miranda v. Arizona, however, the court's final ruling was split in a 5-4 decision. There were many who actually in the aftermath wanted Justice Earl Warren impeached because of the decision, launching a campaign complete with billboards and letters flooding in.
00:28:10
Speaker
I'll read you excerpts of two. One postcard read, quote, because your decision banning confessions, the admitted murderous of her four year old is now free to kill again. Are you proud of your misrepresentation of the Constitution? End quote.
00:28:27
Speaker
One letter penned by a prosecuting attorney, Ralph Barry, reads in part, quote, in so far as I'm concerned, your decision will do nothing but permit rapists, persons molesting minor children, murderers, robbers, and burglars to have an opportunity to escape any punishment for their crimes. I feel certain that the old time anarchists of 50 years ago would feel that you are helping to achieve their ultimate goals.
00:28:53
Speaker
Law enforcement and the rights of organized society are no longer desirable, apparently, in your opinion. I am happy only that the two judges who have had some experience in law enforcement were on the dissension side.
Establishment of Miranda Rights
00:29:07
Speaker
For the five who were on the majority side, I can only say that I regret this decision and feel sorry for the many unfortunate victims of criminal attacks that will result because of your opinion."
00:29:21
Speaker
In Warren's majority opinion, he asserts that with any questioning that is initiated after having been taken into custody called custodial interrogation, meaning that you're not free to leave, must be preceded by being informed of one's rights to remain silent and to an attorney. One further has the right to stop an interrogation at any point, even if some questions have already been answered. Warren stated, quote,
00:29:50
Speaker
We hold that when an individual is taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom by the authorities in any significant way and is subjected to questioning, the privilege against self-incrimination is jeopardized."
00:30:06
Speaker
Several justices, Clark, Harlan, Stewart, and White, in their dissenting opinions, pointed out flaws in the Supreme Court's decision. According to Oyez's coverage of the Miranda v. Arizona case, Justice White believed the Fifth Amendment only protects against self-incrimination if compelled to provide it, and it was his belief
00:30:29
Speaker
that custodial interrogation, like Miranda being in the custody of law enforcement at the station while being questioned, was, quote, not inherently coercive, end quote. Justice Harlan says specifically of Miranda, quote, though at first denying his guilt within a short time, Miranda gave a detailed oral confession and then wrote out in his own hand and signed a brief statement admitting and describing the crime.
00:30:57
Speaker
All this was accomplished in two hours or less without any force, threats, or promises, and without any effective warnings at all. Miranda's oral and written confessions are now held inadmissible under the court's new rules.
00:31:13
Speaker
One is entitled to feel astonished that the Constitution could be read to produce this result. These confessions were obtained during a brief daytime questioning conducted by two officers and unmarked by any of the traditional indicia of coercion. They assured a conviction for a brutal and unsettling crime for which the police had and quite possibly could obtain little evidence other than the victim's identifications.
00:31:43
Speaker
evidence which is frequently unreliable. There was in some a legitimate purpose, no perceptible unfairness and certainly little risk of injustice in the interrogation. Yet the resulting confessions and the responsible course of police practice they represent are to be sacrificed to the court's own fine spun conception of fairness, which I seriously doubt is shared by many thinking citizens in this country."
00:32:13
Speaker
But majority rules. So because of the Supreme Court's decision, the conviction of Ernesto Miranda was overturned. Ultimately, here is why, according to an article about the case published by Thirteen.org, quote, the court maintained that the defendant's rights against self-incrimination had long been part of Anglo-American law as a means to equalize the vulnerability inherent in being detained.
00:32:43
Speaker
Such a position unchecked can often lead to government abuse. For example, the court cited the continued high incidence of police violence designed to compel confessions from a suspect. This and other forms of intimidation maintain the court, deprive criminal suspects of their basic liberties and can lead to false confessions. The defendant's right to an attorney
00:33:06
Speaker
is an equally fundamental right because the presence of an attorney in interrogations, according to Chief Justice Warren, enables the defendant, under otherwise compelling circumstances, to tell his story without fear, effectively, and in a way that eliminates the evils in the interrogation process."
00:33:30
Speaker
The decision then became memorialized by way of the cards that law enforcement across the country then carried on which there were written the four main tenants of the Miranda warning. The right to remain silent. That if you do not remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you. The right to an attorney. And that if you cannot afford an attorney, you may have one appointed if you so wish.
00:33:58
Speaker
While the wording isn't necessary to be consistent across states, the warning must be quote-unquote meaningful, implying that the suspect must be able to understand their rights.
Miranda's Retrial and Subsequent Conviction
00:34:12
Speaker
Since the original conviction was overturned, it meant that Miranda had to be tried again. But this time, his confession
00:34:21
Speaker
and anything Miranda had indicated to law enforcement while in their custody was inadmissible. Since the crime precedes the invention of rape kits, the only thing police had other than the confession they had obtained from Miranda that they can now no longer use was Tricia's testimony. As a naive young girl who had been a virgin and was initially unsure of the difference between her attacker
00:34:50
Speaker
inserting a finger or inserting a penis, and because of the comment that she believed the person in the lineup was her assailant rather than that he absolutely was, Miranda's lawyers tried to tear apart her testimony. Luckily, Trish's attorney found another witness to testify alongside Trish against Miranda. Remember his live-in girlfriend, Twyla Hoffman, the owner of the Packard car?
00:35:20
Speaker
Long since estranged from one another, the arresting officer located her through Miranda's parents. She took the stand to testify that on one of her visits to jail to see Miranda, he confessed to her that he had abducted and raped Trish. That testimony, alongside Trish's testimony, swayed the jury in their decision to again convict Ernesto Miranda.
00:35:50
Speaker
who was again sentenced to 20 to 30 years. Of that sentence, Miranda only served 11 years before being paroled in 1972. When released,
Miranda's Parole and Murder
00:36:03
Speaker
it was clear that he saw himself as something of a hero, announcing who he was to everyone and even autographing Miranda warning cards and then selling his own signature for $1.50 a card.
00:36:19
Speaker
The showmanship ended, though, when on January 31st, 1976, Miranda was stabbed to death in a bar fight in Phoenix, Arizona. Two individuals were detained after the bartender identified the other men involved in the brawl. In a true twist of irony, however, both men were read their Miranda warning, remained silent, and were released.
00:36:47
Speaker
One fled the country, never to be seen again. Call it poetic justice. Call it karma. Call it whatever you like. But because of being read their Miranda warning, Miranda's own murderers invoked their rights. And as a result, no one has ever been charged with his murder.
00:37:11
Speaker
Despite the
Miranda's Victim: Reframing the Narrative
00:37:12
Speaker
fact that we all benefit from knowing our constitutional rights, and I in no way believe that it's a bad thing that law enforcement must remind us of them, it is honestly unsettling to believe that Miranda himself might be hailed as a hero of those rights. It feels wrong to attach his name to a means of protection when he violated the rights of so many.
00:37:39
Speaker
The film Miranda's victim seeks to reverse that connection. It literally flips the script to show the truly heroic actions of Trish Weir, willing to oftentimes stand alone to protect other women from the same attacks.
00:37:59
Speaker
It may be Miranda rights that protect against self-incrimination, but it is Trish Weir who was willing to protect the rights of women, the victims of sexual assault, and those far too often silenced. Hers is the story worth remembering.
00:39:14
Speaker
If you've been listening to our show for more than one episode, then you probably know about my love for animals. What I don't often talk about is the difficulty of meeting all their nutritional needs. Trust me, not all dog food is created equal, but we're about to solve that problem for you. It's called Nom Nom.
00:39:31
Speaker
In Nom Nom, you can actually see proteins and vegetables like beef, chicken, pork, peas, carrots, kale, and more. And ordering it is the easiest way to take the guesswork out of feeding your dog the best. Nom Nom meals are pre-portioned for your dog's exact caloric needs.
00:39:49
Speaker
Isn't it time to feel good about the food you're feeding your dog? Order Nom Nom today. Go to trynom.com slash coffee and cases and get 50% off your first order plus free shipping. And Nom Nom comes with a money back guarantee. That means if your dog doesn't love fresh, delicious meals, Nom Nom will refund your first order. No fillers, no nonsense, just Nom Nom.