Final answer:
Miranda v. Arizona is the Supreme Court case that determined testimonial evidence includes coerced statements, requiring suspects to be informed of their rights to avoid self-incrimination.
Step-by-step explanation:
The Supreme Court case that held that testimonial evidence includes statements made by the defendant, which forces them to disclose information that connects them to a criminal offense or requires them to share their private thoughts or beliefs with the government is Miranda v. Arizona. In this landmark decision, the Court ruled that prosecutors could not use statements stemming from custodial interrogation of defendants unless procedural safeguards were demonstrated to secure the privilege against self-incrimination. The Miranda decision requires that suspects must be informed of their rights, including the right to remain silent and the right to have counsel present during interrogations, to prevent testimonial evidence obtained through coercive means.