Final answer:
An officer is not required to inform a person of all possible topics or of the nature of the investigation as part of an advisory of Miranda rights. Option 2 is correct.
Step-by-step explanation:
An officer does not have to inform a person of 'all possible topics' or of the nature of the investigation when advising of Miranda rights. The Miranda v. Arizona decision established the requirement for law enforcement to inform a suspect of specific rights.
These rights include the right to remain silent, that anything said can be used against them in court, the right to an attorney during questioning, and that if they cannot afford an attorney, one will be provided for them.
The goal of the Miranda warning is to ensure individuals are aware of their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and have the opportunity for legal representation.
The question of whether informing suspects of the nature of the investigation is part of the Miranda rights does not pertain to the essence of the Miranda decision.
The warnings are meant to protect an individual’s Fifth Amendment rights rather than to provide a briefing on the investigation's specifics. As long as the officer provides the Miranda warnings before custodial interrogation, the requirements set forth by the Supreme Court decision are met.
The essence of the Miranda rights is to ensure understanding of one's right to remain silent and to have legal representation, which protects against self-incrimination according to the Fifth Amendment.