Page "Miranda warning" Paragraph 16

The courts have since ruled that the warning must be " meaningful ", so it is usually required that the suspect be asked if he understands his rights.

Sometimes, firm answers of " yes " are required.

Some departments and jurisdictions require that an officer ask " do you understand?

" after every sentence in the warning.

An arrestee's silence is not a waiver, but on June 1, 2010, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that police are allowed to interrogate suspects who have invoked or waived their rights ambiguously, and any statement given during questioning prior to invocation or waiving is admissible as evidence.

Evidence has in some cases been ruled inadmissible because of an arrestee's poor knowledge of English and the failure of arresting officers to provide the warning in the arrestee's language.