Miranda Warnings must be administered to persons who are in custody and who are being asked incriminating questions. If the Miranda Warning is not given to a person under these circumstances, statements made by the suspect can be inadmissible in court.
1. Do you agree with the Obama administration’s stance that suspects accused of terrorism can be questioned without the Miranda warning? Why or why not?
2. What do you think the purpose and/or logic behind questioning suspects in custody for terrorism without giving them the Miranda warning?
3. Why would the FBI question a suspect without Miranda and first and then provide the suspect with the Miranda warning later?
4. If a suspect makes incriminating statements when being questioned without Miranda, should those statements be used against the suspect at a trial later?