文章目录[隐藏]
“You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for you. Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me?”
你有权利保持沉默。但你所说的任何话都会成为呈堂证供。你有权请律师。如果你付不起律师费，我们将为你提供一名律师。你明白我刚才向你宣读的权利吗？考虑到这些权利，你是否愿意与我交谈？
什么是米兰达警告？
米兰达警告是一种警察警告，在美国，被执法部门拘押的犯罪嫌疑人被询问犯罪过程中发生的事情之前，会向他们发出警告。
The Miranda Warning is a police warning which is given to criminal suspects who are in the custody of law enforcement in the United States before they can ask questions regarding what took place during the crime.
执法部门只能要求提供特定信息，例如姓名、出生日期和地址，而不必向嫌疑人宣读米兰达警告。除非你被告知并放弃了你的 "米兰达权利"，否则你向他们提供的供词和其他信息不会构成可接受的证据。
Law enforcement can only ask for specific information such as name, date of birth and address without having to read the suspects their Miranda warnings. Confessions and other information that you provide them will not make up admissible evidence unless you have been made aware of and waived your "Miranda rights."
米兰达警告是1966年美国最高法院在 "米兰达诉亚利桑那州 "一案中作出的裁决，目的是保护犯罪嫌疑人在警察审讯期间避免自证其罪的第五修正案权利。这曾被认为是被”严刑逼供”。
The Miranda warnings were mandated by the 1966 United States Supreme Court decision in the case of Miranda v. Arizona as to protect a criminal suspect's Fifth Amendment right to help avoid self-incrimination during police interrogation. This was once referred to as undergoing the ‘third degree.’
third degree：严刑逼供
米兰达权利和警告对比
Miranda Rights vs Miranda Warning
米兰达权利是你作为美国公民个人拥有的权利。米兰达警告将是官员或执法人员告知你这些权利是什么。
The Miranda rights are the rights that you, as an individual citizen of the United States, have.
The Miranda warning would be when the officer or law enforcement personnel inform you of what those rights are.
米兰达警告历史
History of Miranda Warning
恐吓或胁迫的警察审讯方法曾经通常被称为经历 "三度"。今天，为了保护任何可能发生的警察恐吓，我们有了米兰达警告。
Intimidating or coercive methods of police interrogation were once commonly referred to as undergoing the ‘third degree.’ Today, as protection against any possibility of police intimidation, we have the Miranda Warning.
1966年6月13日，米兰达诉亚利桑那案的结果规定，嫌疑人在被逮捕时必须被告知他们的具体法律权利。这一决定是基于一个案件，其中被告埃内斯托·米兰达被指控抢劫、绑架和强奸。在警察的审讯中，他承认了这些罪行。
On June 13, 1966, the outcome of Miranda v. Arizona provided that suspects must be informed of their specific legal rights when they are placed under arrest. This decision was based on a case in which a defendant, Ernesto Miranda, was accused of robbery, kidnapping, and rape. During police interrogation, he confessed to the crimes.
他的定罪被推翻了，因为据称警察的审讯方法具有恐吓性的。经过包括证人和其他证据的重审，米兰达再次被定罪。然而，他的审判当时被保证是公平的，原来的定罪被合理地维持，没有疑问。
The conviction was overturned due to allegedly intimidating police interrogation methods. After a retrial that included witnesses and other evidence, Miranda was again convicted. His trial was, however, then assured of being fair, and the original conviction was reasonably upheld without question.
1964年，另一个审判结果，即埃斯科贝多诉伊利诺伊州案，又规定，如果警察打算在审判中使用对嫌疑人不利的答案，或者被审讯的人是在违背其意愿的情况下被拘留和审讯，那么嫌疑人有权在警察审讯期间要求律师在场，或者在接受警察审讯之前咨询律师。
In 1964 the results of another trial, Escobedo v. Illinois, additionally provided that a suspect has the right to counsel being present during police questioning or to consult with an attorney before being questioned by police if the police intend to use the answers against the suspect at a trial, or if the person being questioned is being detained and questioned against their will.
1968年，米兰达警告的最终文本是由加利福尼亚州副总检察长多丽丝·迈尔和地区检察官哈罗德·伯林纳提供的。
In 1968 the finalized text for the Miranda Warning was provided by California deputy attorney general Doris Maier and district attorney Harold Berliner.
在设立米兰达警告之前，供词只需是嫌疑人的自愿行为。这给警察带来了困难，因为他们在审判中经常面临证据，证明该人在供认时精神不健全或受到间接胁迫。
Prior to the institution of the Miranda Warning, confessions need only be voluntary on the part of the suspect. This created a difficult situation for police, who were then often faced with evidence at trial that the person was not of sound mind or were under circumstantial duress when they gave their confession.
米兰达警告通过清楚地解释他们的选择来保护个人的权利，并在警察正确地宣读米兰达警告并得到明确、明智的回答，即嫌疑人理解他或她的权利时，维护警察的权威。米兰达警告是整个美国的法律必需品，只是在不同的州，其措辞略有不同。
The Miranda Warning protects an individual’s rights by explaining their options clearly and upholds police authority when they properly read the Miranda Warning and get a clear, intelligent answer that the suspect understands his or her rights as they have been explained. The Miranda Warning is a legal necessity throughout the United States, and varies only slightly in its wording in different states.
