A more thorough explanation:

The Escobedo rule is a principle in criminal procedure that states that a statement made by a suspect in police custody cannot be used as evidence in court unless the police inform the suspect of their right to remain silent and provide them with an opportunity to consult with a lawyer.

This rule was established in the case of Escobedo v. Illinois in 1964 and was a precursor to the Miranda rule.

The Miranda rule is a doctrine that requires police to inform a criminal suspect in custody of their constitutional rights before interrogating them. These rights include:

• The right to remain silent
• The right to have an attorney present during questioning
• The right to have an attorney appointed if the suspect cannot afford one

If the suspect is not informed of these rights or does not waive them, any evidence obtained during the interrogation cannot be used against them in court (except for impeachment purposes).

The Miranda rule was established in the case of Miranda v. Arizona in 1966.

If a suspect is arrested for a crime and taken into police custody, the police must inform them of their right to remain silent and their right to an attorney. If the police fail to do so and the suspect makes a statement, that statement cannot be used as evidence in court.

For example, if a suspect is arrested for robbery and taken into custody, but the police do not inform them of their rights before questioning them, any statements made by the suspect during that questioning cannot be used as evidence in court.