Renowned legal scholar and bestselling author Dershowitz reveals precisely why Fifth Amendment rights matter, and discusses how they are being reshaped, limited, and in some cases revoked in the wake of 9/11.

An urgent, compact manifesto that will teach you how to protect your rights, your freedom, and your future when talking to police. Law professor James J. Duane became a viral sensation thanks to a 2008 lecture outlining the reasons why you should never agree to answer questions from the police--especially if you are innocent and wish to stay out of trouble with the law. In this timely, relevant, and pragmatic new book, he expands on that presentation, offering a vigorous defense of every citizen's constitutionally protected right to avoid self-incrimination. Getting a lawyer is not only the best policy, Professor Duane argues, it's also the advice law-enforcement professionals give their own kids. Using actual case histories of innocent men and women exonerated after decades in prison because of information they voluntarily gave to police, Professor Duane demonstrates the critical importance of a constitutional right not well or widely understood by the average American. Reflecting the most recent attitudes of the Supreme Court, Professor Duane argues that it is now even easier for police to use your own words against you. This lively and informative guide explains what everyone needs to know to protect themselves and those they love.

One of the most significant Supreme Court cases in U.S. history has its roots in Arizona and is closely tied to the stateÕs leading legal figures. Miranda has become a household word; now Gary Stuart tells the inside story of this famous case, and with it the legal history of the accusedÕs right to counsel and silence. Ernesto Miranda was an uneducated Hispanic man arrested in 1963 in connection with a series of sexual assaults, to which he confessed within hours. He was convicted not on the strength of eyewitness testimony or physical evidence but almost entirely because he had incriminated himself without knowing itÑand without knowing that he didnÕt have to. MirandaÕs lawyers, John P. Frank and John F. Flynn, were among the most prominent in the state, and their work soon focused the entire country on the issue of their clientÕs rights. A 1966 Supreme Court decision held that MirandaÕs rights had been violated and resulted in the now-famous "Miranda warnings." Stuart personally knows many of the figures involved in Miranda, and here he unravels its complex history, revealing how the defense attorneys created the argument brought before the Court and analyzing the competing societal interests involved in the case. He considers Miranda's aftermathÑnot only the test cases and ongoing political and legal debate but also what happened to Ernesto Miranda. He then updates the story to the Supreme CourtÕs 2000 Dickerson decision upholding Miranda and considers its implications for cases in the wake of 9/11 and the rights of suspected terrorists. Interviews with 24 individuals directly concerned with the decisionÑlawyers, judges, and police officers, as well as suspects, scholars, and ordinary citizensÑoffer observations on the caseÕs impact on law enforcement and on the rights of the accused. Ten years after the decision in the case that bears his name, Ernesto Miranda was murdered in a knife fight at a Phoenix bar, and his suspected killer was "Mirandized" before confessing to the crime. Miranda: The Story of AmericaÕs Right to Remain Silent considers the legacy of that case and its fate in the twenty-first century as we face new challenges in the criminal justice system.

Page-turning detective fiction from the author of I HEARD YOU PAINT HOUSES / THE IRISHMAN who was himself a homicide investigator and prosecutor. Wisecracking cop Lou Razzi’s zeal, dedication and talent for extracting information from suspects make him destined to rise quickly through the ranks . . . until a frame-up sends him to jail for two years. He loses his career, his marriage, and his baby daughter, and following his release from prison, he leaves the country for a sort of self-imposed exile in Brazil. Fifteen years later, an exonerated, more hardened Razzi comes back to serve a single day on the force and claim his pension. But that one day becomes a continuing education when Razzi is drawn onto a conspiracy and finds his old police tools fruitless in the wake of the Miranda decision. Forced to learn, like a rookie, from his mistakes, he starts to find his way with the help of assistant district attorney Honey Gold. . . and is able to combat the powers that framed him then and thrive now in the new era of police procedure. When The Right to Remain Silent was first published, then-President Ronald Reagan wrote Brandt an unsolicited fan letter: “I commend your novel…for your forthright stand on improving protection of law-abiding citizens.” "The Right to Remain Silent is a novel written and to be read for entertainment, but it also encourages study of the art of interrogation and contains the line that 'confession is one of the necessities of life, like food and shelter.'" -- Charles Brandt from the Preface

Following Jeff Foxworthy and Larry the Cable Guy from the Blue Collar Comedy Tour to the page, White (affectionately known as RTater SaladS) delivers the laughs in his distinctive and beloved down-home style.

Within an international context in which the right to silence has long been regarded as sacrosanct, this book provides the first comprehensive, empirically-based analysis of the effects of curtailing the right to silence. The right to silence has served as the practical expression of the principles that an individual was to be considered innocent until proven guilty, and that it was for the prosecution to establish guilt. In 1791, the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution proclaimed that none ‘shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself’. In more recent times, the privilege against self-incrimination has been a founding principle for the International Criminal Court, the new South African constitution and the ad hoc International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. Despite this pedigree, over the past 30 years when governments have felt under pressure to combat crime or terrorism, the right to silence has been reconsidered (as in Australia), curtailed (in most of the United Kingdom) or circumvented (by the creation of the military tribunals to try the Guantánamo detainees). The analysis here focuses upon the effects of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 in England and Wales. There, curtailing the right to silence was advocated in terms of ‘common sense’ policy-making and was achieved by an eclectic borrowing of concepts and policies from other jurisdictions. The implications of curtailing this right are here explored in detail with reference to England, Wales and Northern Ireland, but within a comparative context that examines how different ‘types’ of legal systems regard the right to silence and the effects of constitutional protection.

An eminent constitutional scholar reveals how our approach to rights is dividing America, and shows how we can build a better system of justice.