Final answer:
It is true that the waiver of Miranda rights does not have to be explicit or in writing. The Supreme Court's decision in Miranda v. Arizona stipulated that suspects must be informed of their rights, but they can waive these rights verbally, nonverbally, or through a knowing and voluntary statement.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that a waiver of Miranda rights does not have to be in writing or even explicit is true. The landmark case Miranda v. Arizona, which established these rights, mandates that law enforcement must advise suspects of their rights; however, once advised, suspects may waive them verbally, nonverbally, or by making a knowing and voluntary written statement.
During the deliberations in the Miranda v. Arizona case, the Supreme Court noted the coercive nature of custodial interrogations and stated that procedural safeguards must be in place to ensure the protection against self-incrimination. These safeguards include advising suspects of their rights to remain silent, have an attorney present, and the assurance that they can terminate the interrogation at any point.
It was also noted that if the suspect clearly understands and acknowledges these rights, they can choose to waive them and any information obtained thereafter can be admissible in court. However, the outcome can be different if law enforcement officials fail to properly communicate these rights or if coercion is implied, which could render a confession involuntary and unconstitutional.