A statement of a person accused of a crime may be used against him if it appears the statement was freely and voluntarily made without compulsion or persuasion. Often a person accused of a crime will make a statement concerning the facts of the alleged offense. The statement given to the police by a person accused of a crime may be accurate. However, in some situations, a person may be coerced into giving a false statement which may incriminate them. A person may be put in fear of increased punishment or persuaded by the promise of a lesser punishment if he cooperates. Police interrogation tactics are often designed to produce a confession at any cost. The police are very good in interrogation techniques. They are trained professionals. A person who is accused of a crime who thinks they can outsmart the police has already put one foot in the jail cell.
If there is one point I would want a person to take away it is this. KEEP YOUR MOUTH QUIET UNTIL YOU SPEAK TO AN ATTORNEY! Regardless of what a person may have heard or been told, the police do not generally control the making of any “deals” to reduce criminal charges. It is the District Attorney’s Office that has the final word on the charges brought against a defendant.
A written statement may be used against a person from the result of a custodial interrogation (in custody) if, on the face of the statement, the person has been given their Miranda Rights and they have knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived those rights.
An oral statement as the result of a custodial interrogation can be used against the accused if the statement is electronically recorded, which includes motion picture, video tape, or other visual recording. Prior to the statement but during the recording, the person must be given their Miranda warning just as in the written statement situation.