 Other legal responses included Stanford University law professor Robert Weisberg , who stated that " this decision authorizes lower courts to construe ambiguous situations in favor of police and prosecutors " , and University of Michigan law professor Richard Friedman who concluded , " [ t ] his decision means that police can keep shooting questions at a suspect who refuses to talk as long as they want in hopes that the person will crack and give them some information ... It 's a little bit less restraint that the officers have to show . " 
