Peter Mallory and James Reid were widely considered by their peers and by the community at large the very best officers the San Bernardino, California Police Department had to offer. Today, they were seeking to uphold that reputation. After weeks of tracking Malcolm Leary, a suspect in last year’s gruesome murder of 32-year-old Rachel Vang, they had located and detained Leary pursuant to a validly issued arrest warrant.
On their way back to the headquarters in the squad car, with Mallory and Reid silent, Leary offers up a confession from the back seat, saying “I killed that witch because she deserved it, and if I have to spend the rest of my life in prison and eternity in hell for doing it, it was worth it!” Both Mallory and Reid are shocked that Leary “broke” so easily, but they are happy to have the confession.
Prior to his declaration of murder, neither Mallory nor Reid had “Mirandized” Leary. Will Malcolm Leary’s statement be admissible in his criminal prosecution, or will it be inadmissible based on a violation of the due process standard set forth in Miranda v. Arizona?
Welcome to Legit Writing
