Interogation and inscrimination

Miranda is required every time that you question someone about crime that might lead to incriminating answers or statements. This is an interrogation, so therefore you must ALWAYS "mirandize" a person. Is this a true statement? Why or Why Not????Think about the two conditions of custody and interrogation reply #1 This is not a true statement. Miranda was created because it was felt that the stress, nervousness, and intimidation, a person in custody being interrogated by police would likely feel, would undermine their free-will and the person might lose the ability to choose for himself whether to speak or remain silent. Miranda is only required when the following two elements exist: 1) a person is in custody of the police; 2) an interrogation is sbout to take place. BOTH of these are required before Miranda Rights MUST be read. aj22 question #2 (number 8) Chapter 8 deals with disturbances, some of which are groups of people acting together to breach the peace.?Consider this statement:?"there is no real difference between an unlawful assembly, a rout or a riot." Do you agree? aj22 question #3 A previously convicted felon who possess a firearm for hunting can only be found in violation of the illegal possession law if he uses the weapon in a felony. Do you agree? Why or why not? aj 22 question #4 Read the chapter and re-read section 1014, Domestic Violence?The California legislature has deemed 273.5 PC a felony. If the same event occurred in a non-domestic relationship it would be a misdemeanor. Do you agree? Why or why not?