Which of the following best describes the miranda v. arizona case and its significance?

miranda v. arizona was about being wrongly identified by an accuser. the case create a rule that more than an accuser's identification was needed for an arrest.

miranda v. arizona was about confessing without an attorney present. the case create a rule that an attorney must be present for suspects being questioned by police.

miranda v. arizona was about protecting a person's 5th and 6th amendment rights. the ruling gave police the burden of reminding citizens of their rights when arrested.

miranda v. arizona was about a signed confession obtained by conspiracy between police and miranda's attorney. the judge ruled that attorneys must be self or court appointed.