Which practice risks rendering a confession inadmissible?

• A. Failing to administer Miranda warnings
• B. Recording the interrogation
• C. Obtaining a written waiver
• D. Having an officer present who is not trained

Answer: (A)

The key idea is Miranda rights: when someone is in custody and being questioned, they must be warned about their right to remain silent and to have an attorney, and they must voluntarily waive those rights. If those warnings aren’t given, statements made during that custodial interrogation are generally not admissible as evidence at trial. The warning process is what protects against coercive questioning and ensures any confession is voluntary. A proper, voluntary written waiver after you’ve provided the warnings can make the confession admissible, but you can’t fix the problem simply by later obtaining a waiver if no warnings were given in the first place.

Recording the interrogation is generally permissible and can actually help establish what happened. Obtaining a written waiver is acceptable as long as the warnings were correctly provided and the waiver is voluntary. Having an officer present who isn’t trained isn’t the same immediate risk to admissibility as failing to give the warnings, though poor interviewing practices can still raise questions about coercion and affect how the confession is viewed.