The case <em>Miranda v. Arizona (1966)</em> was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court in which the court established that prosecutors cannot use a person's statements made in response to interrogation in police custody as evidence at their trial, unless the person was informed of what is known as "Miranda warning," but voluntarily waived these rights.
A "Miranda warning" is an explanation given to people arrested that informs them of the right to consult with an attorney before and during questioning. It also informs them of the right against self-incrimination before police questioning. The court's ruling protect those accused of a crime because it prevents them from incriminating themselves. It also reminds them of the importance of an attorney for achieving a successful trial.
- The Existence of White Holes
Everyone knows about black holes and how their immense gravity sucks in everything around them, including light. But what about white holes? Theoretically, they’re the exact opposite of a black hole and instead of sucking in matter they spit it out.
Answer:
the last answer. killing all the Jews in Europe.
Explanation:
C playful because there funny and original
It’s in the picture to at least help you out from the best of my knowledge
