Whether Miranda warnings adequately protect the constitutional rights of mentally ill individuals during custodial police interrogations and require appointment of counsel

1. Was Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1966) decided for that specific class of persons "not mentally ill" that is, not suffering from a clinically recognized mental health disorder and/or condition. 2. For the specific class of persons who are mentally ill, and suffering from a recognized clinical mental health disorder at time of a custodial police interrogation, does the traditional Miranda warnings stand fair honest and true to meaningfully protect a mentally ill person's Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment United States Constitutional Right via the appointment and assistance of counsel in order to make a true knowing, and intelligent waiver of a fundamental right to remain silent and have the appointment and assistance of counsel during the custodial police interrogation? 3. And must the appointment and assistance of counsel be provided to a mentally ill person before any custodial police interrogation if such person who falls into this specific class (suffering from mental illness) indicates in any manner prior to custodial police interrogation that their expering a mental health crisis; shall counsel be provided in light of this critical circumstance especially when such person is otherwise legally entitled to the appointment and assistance of counsel? 4. If the appointment and assistance of counsel is not present during a custodial police interrogation against a person who is mentally ill, were such mentally ill person's Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights violated? I 5. And must this rule apply retroactive to all such person's who can demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that prior to the custodial police interrogation they too were suffering from a clinically recognized mental health disorder? Suggested answer. Yes. All person's suffering from a current state of mental health / crisis (i.e., clinically recognized crisis of the mind) must have counsel present during any custodial police interrogation prior to being asked to waive such a vital and critical Constitutional right. Justice in all such cases will be served. In all other cases such a person rights are indeed violated, and any statements taken in violation must be suppressed and a new trial granted. See