金融法律辅导:法律英语导读(8)

网络资源 Freekaoyan.com/2008-04-25

鐐瑰嚮绔嬪嵆鎼滅储2涓囩鑰冪爺鐢靛瓙鐗堣祫鏂欙紒
澶ч儴鍒嗙闉嬮兘鏄涓€娆¤€冪爺锛屽浜庡浣曟煡鎵句笓涓氳鎸囧畾鏁欐潗锛屾垨璁告湁寰堝鐤戦棶銆侳ree澹逛桨鍒嗗涔犵綉鑰冪爺娣辫€曚笓涓氳杈呭20骞达紝鎬荤粨浜嗚秴瀹炵敤鐨勬寚瀹氭暀鏉愭煡璇㈡柟娉曞強澶嶄範鏂规硶锛屾湁闇€瑕佺殑鐪嬭繃鏉�

   If I Don't Have to Answer Questions, Does This Mean I Can Sue(控告) a Police Officer for Trying to Question Me?

  No. Even in the complete absence of probable cause to arrest or suspicion to conduct a "stop and frisk," police officers have the same right as anyone else to approach people and try to talk to them. Of course, if the person refuses to talk, the officer must stop.

  Case Example: Officer Stan Doff knocks on the front door of Dee Fensive's home. When Dee answers the door, the officer says, "I'd like to ask you a few questions about a robbery (抢劫)that took place across the street a few minutes ago. Have you noticed any suspicious (可疑的)people hanging around the neighborhood lately?" Dee indicates that She has seen nothing, does not want to talk further and closes the door. Officer Doff then leaves.

  Question: Has the officer violated (侵犯)Dee's rights?

  Answer: No. The officer has a right to try to question Dee. When Dee indicated that she did not want to talk, the officer ended the interview. The officer's actions are legally proper.

  8. Doesn't a Police Officer Always Have to Read Me My "Miranda Rights(米兰达权利)" Before Questioning Me?

  No. A "Miranda warning](米兰达警告)" essentially advises people of their constitutional right to not answer questions and to have an attorney present if they do decide to talk to police officers. (See Question 13.) But the Miranda warning is required only if the person being questioned is in custody and the police want to later use the answers in court. This means that statements by a person not in custody may later be used against the person in court even though no Miranda warning was given. (See Question 19.)

  Case Example: Officer Dave Bouncer is investigating a barroom(酒吧间) brawl(斗殴). The bartender indicates that a patron named Bob Sawyer might be able to identify the instigator(挑起者、煽动者) of the brawl. When Officer Bouncer interviews Bob, Bob makes statements implicating himself in the brawl. Officer Bouncer did not read Bob his "Miranda rights."

  Question: If Bob is charged with a crime concerning the brawl, will Bob's statements to Officer Bouncer be admissible as evidence(证据)?

  Answer: Yes. At the time Officer Bouncer spoke to Bob, Bob was not in custody. Thus, "Miranda warnings" were not required as a condition of admissibility.

  本节的问题:  1、米兰达警告的内容是什么?中英文回答均可。
  2、警官在什么情况下无需提出米兰达警告,而取得的证据可作为控诉的依据?

  答案:  1、
  · You have the right to remain silent.
  · If you do say anything, what you say can be used against you in a court of law.
  · You have the right to consult with a lawyer and have that lawyer present during any questioning.
  · If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be appointed for you if you so desire
  2、
  没有被羁押,NOT IN CUSTODY

鐐瑰嚮绔嬪嵆鎼滅储2涓囩鑰冪爺鐢靛瓙鐗堣祫鏂欙紒
澶ч儴鍒嗙闉嬮兘鏄涓€娆¤€冪爺锛屽浜庡浣曟煡鎵句笓涓氳鎸囧畾鏁欐潗锛屾垨璁告湁寰堝鐤戦棶銆侳ree澹逛桨鍒嗗涔犵綉鑰冪爺娣辫€曚笓涓氳杈呭20骞达紝鎬荤粨浜嗚秴瀹炵敤鐨勬寚瀹氭暀鏉愭煡璇㈡柟娉曞強澶嶄範鏂规硶锛屾湁闇€瑕佺殑鐪嬭繃鏉�

相关话题/

  • 领限时大额优惠券,享本站正版考研考试资料!
    大额优惠券
    优惠券领取后72小时内有效,10万种最新考研考试考证类电子打印资料任你选。涵盖全国500余所院校考研专业课、200多种职业资格考试、1100多种经典教材,产品类型包含电子书、题库、全套资料以及视频,无论您是考研复习、考证刷题,还是考前冲刺等,不同类型的产品可满足您学习上的不同需求。 ...
    本站小编 Free壹佰分学习网 2022-09-19
涓€鏉ザ鑼剁殑閽卞氨鍙互涔板埌鑰冪爺涓撲笟璇捐祫鏂欙紒
2涓囩鑰冪爺鐢靛瓙涔︼紙棰樺簱銆佽棰戙€佸叏濂楄祫鏂欙級鍙婂巻骞寸湡棰橈紝娑电洊547鎵€闄㈡牎4涓囦綑涓€冪爺鑰冨崥涓撲笟绉戠洰銆佽€冪爺鍏叡璇撅紙鏀挎不鑻辫鏁板锛夈€�40绉嶄笓涓氱澹紙閲戣瀺纭曞+銆丮BA銆佸浗闄呭晢鍔$澹€佹柊闂讳紶鎾澹€佺ぞ浼氬伐浣滅澹瓑锛夈€�28绫诲悓绛夊鍔涚敵纭曚笓涓氥€�1130绉嶇粡鍏告暀鏉愩€�