|← Types of Evidences||Administration of Justice and Security Integration →|
Self incrimination is confession of a crime committed the information gathered after questioning can be acted upon but not against the source in court. When John began incriminating himself, the police were to give what is known as a Miranda warning to entitle him his constitutional rights, remain silent and that of having a personal legal representative, and persons cannot afford one, then the government can provide a lawyer for them. In this particular case since John is a foreigner, then the officers should advice him to contact his country's consulate before the questioning commences. The rules come in no specified order so long as the people to whom they are conveyed understand them (Criminalinfonetwork, 2007). This was from the decided case of Miranda v Arizona which was a rape and kidnapping theft it provides that such incriminating evidence is not admissible in court unless if they had been given this particular rights and still insisted on waiving the said rights.
The police officers are to allow the suspects to speak to his advocate who will be able to advice him on his prospects. john should be taken to court after forty-eight hours, within which persons are to have their figure prints done, photographs taken and their details entered in the Justice Information Management (Criminalinfonetwork, 2010). Since John is a first time offender then he has not other records for which can be used as reference. The interview evidence should be registered exactly as the narrator put it. The court should be in a position to advice person on which is the better method of litigation to use between a grand Jury and a Preliminary hearing.
The latter is held soon subsequent to the arraignment. This is more or less like hearing being done before the actual hearing in which the judge decides on the guilt or innocence of the accused. It is in this process that he decides whether the case is fit for hearing in a court of law before a reasonable jury (Hinson, 2010). The judge sits before a counsel who with help of witnesses is able to come up with reasonable excuse for his client. And reasons for which actual hearing are necessary.
A plea bargain can be advocated where the preliminary hearing is decided. The procedures assist persons to go and improve the trail process; it gives an opportunity for proper investigations to be carried out and for the persons to be tried and for the jury to identify themselves with the case (Staff, 2010).
Preliminary hearing proceeds to a Grand Jury which finally decides if the evidence is adequate. A jury takes part in all the proceeds. The Judge is at liberty to limit the suspect's defense without the proper skills being present. When setting bond for John, the judge will consider the facts of the case given and the cost of the stolen item in a bid to estimate what amount of bond is due (Lamar, 2010). The amount should not be more than the amount that John earns meaning that it would be unfair if it were. An arraignment is how one is taken to court and the allegations against them read out and then the person is given a chance to accept or deny.