27 Wisconsin International Law Journal 271 (2009)
This article examines interrogation practices in detail in three systems: the American, the English (and Welsh), and the Canadian while also discussing rules from various other countries. It considers when the Miranda-type warnings (required in all three systems) must be given and when suspects will be deemed to have waived their rights. This article further discusses how reliability and voluntariness of confession is assured. Finally, a particular emphasis is placed on the issue of when a suspect's silence during interrogation may be used against him in court. The article concludes that American courts have not done enough to ensure reliability and voluntariness. In addition, the article further argues that the English approach whereby a suspect is warned that silence during interrogation may be used against him in court, and then it is so used, is fair. The article explains why this approach is not inconsistent with Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610 (1976) which bans such use based on the current Miranda warnings. It suggests that a fifth warning as to use in court be added to the Miranda warnings.
Bradley, Craig M., "Interrogation and Silence: A Comparative Study" (2009). Articles by Maurer Faculty. Paper 161.