If a detainee does not respond to Miranda warnings, what will the Court presume?

The presumption when a detainee does not respond to Miranda warnings is that there is no presumption of waiver or assertion of rights. This principle is grounded in the understanding that simply remaining silent or failing to provide a response to the warnings does not indicate a conscious decision to waive rights or to assert them. The Supreme Court has ruled that the lack of response does not imply anything about the detainee's intentions regarding their rights under Miranda v. Arizona.

For instance, if a detainee is silent after being read their rights, courts often recognize that silence does not constitute agreement or disagreement. It leaves the determination of the individual's awareness and intention regarding their Miranda rights ambiguous, thus leading to the presumption that there is no waiver of rights or assertion of them. This means that law enforcement officers cannot assume the detainee has waived their rights simply because there is no verbal acknowledgment.

This nuanced understanding honors the Fifth Amendment protections against self-incrimination and aligns with the Miranda ruling's purpose of ensuring that individuals are fully aware of and can exercise their rights during custodial interrogation.