What constitutes "interrogation" under Miranda rights?

The correct interpretation of "interrogation" under Miranda rights encompasses any behavior that elicits an incriminating response from a suspect. This definition aligns with the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Miranda v. Arizona, which established that interrogation includes not only direct questioning but also any actions or words on the part of law enforcement that would lead a reasonable person in custody to feel compelled to provide self-incriminating information.

This broad interpretation means that law enforcement techniques like psychological manipulation or any subtle conversational tactics designed to coax incriminating statements from a suspect fall under the umbrella of interrogation. It is important to understand that the focus is not strictly on the formality of questioning but rather on the potential for eliciting self-incriminating responses, which can occur in various contexts, not just through overtly aggressive or formal questioning.

The other choices do not accurately capture this legal standard. Questions directed toward witnesses generally do not involve a suspect's rights under Miranda, as these inquiries are aimed at collecting information from individuals who are not in custody. Formal questioning by law enforcement does apply but is too narrow of a definition, as it overlooks the subtleties in behavior that can also be considered interrogation. Similarly, casual conversation about a crime, unless