Missouri v. Seibert

Patrice Seibert was accused of committing the crime of arson, because of a fire that occurred at her family’s mobile home. This fire that she made ended in a fatality. One being her son the other being another mentally-ill young man living with the family. Seibert’s son was suffering from a disease called cerebral palsy, and he died prior to the fire in his sleep. Once Seibert discovered her son was dead she was afraid of getting in trouble, so she set the house on fire in order to cover up the death of her son. Once police came they began questioning Seibert without giving her the Miranda warnings. At the police station, Hanrahan interrogated her for forty minutes within this time period she made multiple incriminating statements. After she gave incriminating statements Hanrahan gave her a break then proceeded to give Seibert her Miranda Rights on tape recorder, but at this point she waved them, so he proceeded interrogating her (while the tape recorder is rolling). Once he kept going he asked her to repeat the incriminating statements and she did.

Although she is guilty the police knowingly went around the due process of law that they must follow in order to question a individual. The exclusionary rule comes into play as well during this case. Where evidence illegally obtained can not be of use. I agree with the court’s decision because of the facts of this case. If the police would have gotten away with this and convicted Seibert this would have been the new standard for future cases. Which means police would be capable of getting away with much more. Therefore in my eyes it is good that the police got stopped now than later down the road, because then it would be too late.