§ 5-2 Confession—Detailed Charge
There has been admitted into evidence in this case a statement or confession alleged to have been made by the defendant. Before you may consider this confession or statement as evidence for any purpose, you must determine four questions:
(1) Did the defendant make the statement?
(2) Was the defendant warned of his constitutional rights?
(3) Did the defendant knowingly and intelligently waive his constitutional rights?
(4) Was the statement given freely and voluntarily?
The fact that the court has admitted a statement into evidence should not be considered by you as any evidence whatsoever that the defendant made such a statement or that the constitutional safeguards which are required were in fact provided and waived by the defendant, or that the statement was voluntarily given, because these issues are for you, the jury, to determine. The State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt each of the four essentials or the four requirements which I have just stated to you, before you may consider the statement as evidence for any purpose whatsoever.
As to the first requirement, did the defendant make a statement? If you conclude that the defendant did not make the statement, you must then completely and totally disregard the statement. If you conclude the defendant did not make the statement, you cannot and you must not consider the statement as evidence in any manner whatsoever, and you should completely disregard the statement in its entirety and every part of it. If you find the defendant did make the statement, you must then consider the second requirement.
The second requirement: Was the defendant warned of his constitutional rights? These are also referred to in the law as the Miranda warnings. When an individual is taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way by a police or law enforcement officer, he must be warned of his constitutional rights prior and before any custodial interrogation or custodial questioning. These rights are:
(1) he has the right to remain silent;
(2) any statement he does make can and will be used against him in a court of law;
(3) he has the right to select a lawyer of his choice, but if he does not have the money or resources to employ a lawyer, the court will appoint and provide a lawyer to represent him without cost or expense to him, if he so desires;
(4) he has the right to consult a lawyer before answering any questions or making any statement;
(5) he has the right to have his lawyer present with him at all times during all interviews and all interrogations.
If you determine that these constitutional warnings were not given to the defendant prior to interrogation and the taking of the statement, or that the defendant was not afforded the opportunity to exercise these rights, you must completely disregard the statement and you cannot consider the statement as evidence in any manner whatsoever. If you find the defendant did make the statement and if you conclude these constitutional warnings were in fact given to the defendant and that the defendant was afforded an opportunity to exercise these constitutional rights, you must next consider the third requirement.
The third requirement: Did the defendant knowingly and intelligently waive his constitutional rights? Before you can consider the statement as evidence in the case, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant, after being given his constitutional warnings, knowingly and intelligently waived his constitutional rights and agreed to answer questions and make a statement. Therefore, if you find the defendant did not knowingly and intelligently waive his constitutional rights, then any answer given by him or any statement made by him cannot be used against him and you must completely disregard all of the testimony concerning any such answers or alleged statement. If you find the defendant did make the statement and if you conclude the constitutional warnings were in fact given to the defendant, and that the defendant was afforded an opportunity to exercise these constitutional rights, and if you further find the defendant, after being given his constitutional warnings, knowingly and intelligently waived his constitutional rights, and agreed to answer questions and make a statement, you must next consider the fourth requirement.
The fourth requirement: Was the statement given freely and voluntarily? The word voluntarily means the statement was the expression of the defendant's own free will and was not induced by the pressure, force, or fear, or the influence, hope or promise of some benefit or reward, or extracted by threats, coercion, or intimidation. Voluntarily means intentionally, without coercion. A statement is not freely and voluntarily given and may not be used against a defendant unless it is the product of an essentially free and unconstrained choice by its maker. If the statement is freely and voluntarily given, if the defendant has willed to make a statement, it may be used against him. If the statement is not voluntary, it cannot be used against him. The true test to be applied is whether such statement is freely, voluntarily, and understandingly made without compulsion or inducement.
In determining whether the alleged statement of the defendant was freely and voluntarily given, you must consider all of the facts and circumstances surrounding the taking or the making of the statement concerning and relating to the voluntary or...
