True Confessions: The Long Road Back From Miranda

When, during an appearance on This Week with David Brinkley about two months ago, Attorney General Edwin Meese used the word “infamous” to describe the Miranda decision—the Warren Court’s ruling requiring the police to “read defendants their rights” before questioning—he generated a predictable flurry of protest. Few voices were raised in his defense, even from conservative quarters. For the principles of Miranda, although revolutionary, have been thoroughly, if grudgingly, incorporated into American life, accepted not only by the criminal-justice system but by most Americans.

The reason is relatively simple—the myth of the Miranda case is far more compelling than the reality. In the common view, Miranda was necessary to protect accused criminals from being forced to confess through coercion or torture. Everyone is justifiably horrified at the possibility of punishing an innocent man. In order to avoid this extreme injustice, it was argued, it might be necessary at first to let a few obviously guilty murderers, rapists, and robbers go free on “technicalities,” while the police “learned the ropes.” A painful price, but one most Americans eventually accepted as inevitable.

About the Author

William Tucker

Mr. Tucker is author of Terrestrial Energy: How Nuclear Power Will Lead the Green Revolution and End America’s Energy Odyssey.

Featured Tags

When, during an appearance on This Week with David Brinkley about two months ago, Attorney General Edwin Meese used the word “infamous” to describe the Miranda decision—the Warren Court’s ruling requiring the police to “read defendants their rights” before questioning—he generated a predictable flurry of protest. Few voices were raised in his defense, even from conservative quarters. For the principles of Miranda, although revolutionary, have been thoroughly, if grudgingly, incorporated into American life, accepted not only by the criminal-justice system but by most Americans.

The reason is relatively simple—the myth of the Miranda case is far more compelling than the reality. In the common view, Miranda was necessary to protect accused criminals from being forced to confess through coercion or torture. Everyone is justifiably horrified at the possibility of punishing an innocent man. In order to avoid this extreme injustice, it was argued, it might be necessary at first to let a few obviously guilty murderers, rapists, and robbers go free on “technicalities,” while the police “learned the ropes.” A painful price, but one most Americans eventually accepted as inevitable.