Rachael was arrested by the police on suspicion of possession of a controlled substance. She was informed of her Miranda rights.
Rachael waived her right to remain silent and confessed to the crime after a brief period of police interrogation. Her confession is: A. inadmissible because it was obtained in violation of her Fifth Amendment rights. B. admissible, according to the "search incident to a lawful arrest" exception to Miranda. C. admissible, according to Supreme Court precedent. D. inadmissible because it was obtained in violation of her Fourth Amendment rights.
Based on the given scenario, we can see that Rachael's confession is:
C. admissible, according to Supreme Court precedent.
<h3>What are Human Rights?</h3>
This refers to those inalienable privileges which a human being which cannot be taken away unless under special circumstances and some of them include:
Right to life
Right to fair hearing
Freedom of assembly, etc
With this in mind, we can see that Rachael waived her Fofth Amendment rights and confessed to a crime after brief interrogation by the police so this is admissible, according to Supreme Court precedent.
