![]() ![]() The detectives tell him that they have enough evidence to charge him for the death of the other student and unless he confesses he will go directly to jail and not see his parents. He is kept from his parents in excess of 12 hours, and denied a break from questioning. Suppose four detectives continue to question the juvenile even after his repeated requests to speak with his parents. Which of the following is not a factor to consider in determining whether juveniles made their statements voluntarily and whether they voluntarily waived their rights under the Self-Incrimination Clause following a Miranda warning? He is released to his parents pending his court appearance. The suspect is charged on juvenile delinquency complaints for the possession and distribution of drugs on school property. The boy's parents arrive at headquarters three hours later and tell him not to answer any more questions. He stops speaking other than to repeatedly ask to speak with his parents. I am not talking about anyone else." The detectives then advise him that another high school student overdosed and died from the same drugs he was dealing. He remains silent in response to questions regarding who his supplier is stating "I'm not a snitch. The juvenile repeats his previous confession he gave to the principal. He is then questioned regarding the drugs and from whom he has been obtaining the drugs to sell at school. The juvenile detectives provide the boy with his Miranda warning which he indicates that he understands. ![]() The detectives attempt to reach the juvenile's parents without success. The detectives are familiar with the juvenile as he has two prior arrests for theft. The detectives transport the juvenile to the police station where he is placed in a juvenile interview room. The principal advises the juvenile detectives of the boy's confession. The boy and the drugs are turned over to juvenile detectives. The boy confesses to supplying small quantities of drugs to a few friends. A 16-year-old male suspect is detained and questioned by his school principal regarding drugs found in his school locker. Robert is charged with arson and insurance fraud.Ĭan Robert's incriminating statements to the other shop owners be used in court? Robert then requests an attorney and stops answering questions. Police then confront him with the statements he made to the other shop owners and other corroborating evidence. Police confront Robert with inaccuracies between his statements. He is provided his Miranda warning and then asked to recount his previous statements at the scene regarding the fire and his whereabouts that night. ![]() Robert is brought into police headquarters and interviewed by detectives regarding the arson of his commercial property. Police find several inconsistencies in Robert's various accounts. Suspecting that Robert was involved in the fire, the insurance investigator provides police with her investigative findings and the statements provided to her. The insurance company investigator also interviews Robert concerning the business, the fire and his financials. Then, on two occasions since the fire, he had bragged how he got himself a brand new store and a fresh start with just a well-placed cigarette and extra insurance. Two neighboring shop owners report to an insurance company investigator that the deli owner, Robert, had been complaining for months about losing money and had said that if business didn't pick up he would burn the place down. Atlas Insurance Company is conducting its own investigation into the insurance claim due to a change in the level of coverage four months prior to the fire. Police investigated a suspicious fire case and possible arson of a local deli, which has gone unsolved for over three months. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |