Misleading, especially the headline. The case doesn't directly concern the admissibility or implications of 5th amendment refusal to testify; that's settled law

Misleading, especially the headline. The case doesn't directly concern the admissibility or implications of 5th amendment refusal to testify; that's settled law, as of Griffin v. California (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griffin_v._California http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griffin_v._California). This case asks if 5th amendment rights only attach once a suspect has been arrested. If the Court finds that the 5th amendment (and, by extension, the Miranda rule) applies to pre-arrest interviews, then the Griffin rule applies, and such silences are inadmissable.