<Li> they have the right, if they cannot afford the services of an attorney, to have one appointed, at public expense and without cost to them, to represent them before and during the questioning . </Li> <P> There is no precise language that must be used in advising a suspect of their Miranda rights . The point is that whatever language is used the substance of the rights outlined above must be communicated to the suspect . The suspect may be advised of their rights orally or in writing . Also, officers must make sure the suspect understands what the officer is saying, taking into account potential education levels . It may be necessary to "translate" to the suspect's level of understanding . Courts have ruled this admissible as long as the original waiver is said and the "translation" is recorded either on paper or on tape . </P> <P> The Supreme Court has resisted efforts to require officers to more fully advise suspects of their rights . For example, the police are not required to advise the suspect that they can stop the interrogation at any time, that the decision to exercise the right cannot be used against the suspect, or that they have a right to talk to a lawyer before being asked any questions . Nor have the courts required to explain the rights . For example, the standard Miranda right to counsel states You have a right to have an attorney present during the questioning . Police are not required to explain that this right is not merely a right to have a lawyer present while the suspect is being questioned . The right to counsel includes: </P> <Ul> <Li> the right to talk to a lawyer before deciding whether to talk to police, </Li> <Li> if the defendant decides to talk to the police, the right to consult with a lawyer before being interrogated, </Li> <Li> the right to answer police only through an attorney . </Li> </Ul>

When must a suspect be read their miranda rights