Escobedo Vs Illinois Case
From 1960 until 1964 the Escobedo v. Illinois trial was taking place. This trial was over whether or not Escobedo’s rights were violated when he was arrested. Throughout Escobedo’s arrest and interrogation his constitutional rights were indeed violated, as he was not allowed to see his lawyer during his interrogation. Yet without a specific law in place it took various levels of the United States court system to come up with a final verdict for this case. As a result, Escobedo’s Rule was established giving suspects the right to an attorney during an investigation.
On January 30, 1960, Chicago police apprehended Danny Escobedo, without a warrant. He was suspected to be the killer in a murder investigation. Eleven days prior to Escobedo’s …show more content…
Nevertheless the police had their excuses for going against these …show more content…
They asserted that Escobedo was never formally arrested; therefore, he was never considered an accused personal and did not legally have the right to an attorney. And since “the investigation took place en route to the police station,” (4) the police claimed that the questioning could have never surpassed the level of a general inquiry. The contrast between Escobedo’s and the police’s stories was so drastic that it created much controversy changing the verdict four times.
The first time this case was tried in an Illinois court Escobedo was declared guilty. During the interrogation, the police took Escobedo to face the man who told the police about Escobedo being involved with the murder, DiGerlando. Escobedo cried to DiGerlando, "I didn't kill Manuel, you did it." This proclamation was the only thing that Escobedo had said that put him at the scene of the crime. (5) After the first mistake of Escobedo blurting out this incriminating statement, he continued to say things that later was used to convict
On January 30, 1960, Chicago police apprehended Danny Escobedo, without a warrant. He was suspected to be the killer in a murder investigation. Eleven days prior to Escobedo’s …show more content…
Nevertheless the police had their excuses for going against these …show more content…
They asserted that Escobedo was never formally arrested; therefore, he was never considered an accused personal and did not legally have the right to an attorney. And since “the investigation took place en route to the police station,” (4) the police claimed that the questioning could have never surpassed the level of a general inquiry. The contrast between Escobedo’s and the police’s stories was so drastic that it created much controversy changing the verdict four times.
The first time this case was tried in an Illinois court Escobedo was declared guilty. During the interrogation, the police took Escobedo to face the man who told the police about Escobedo being involved with the murder, DiGerlando. Escobedo cried to DiGerlando, "I didn't kill Manuel, you did it." This proclamation was the only thing that Escobedo had said that put him at the scene of the crime. (5) After the first mistake of Escobedo blurting out this incriminating statement, he continued to say things that later was used to convict