Which choice is not required to ensure the admissibility of a statement given to a custodial suspect?

The right to face their accusers is a constitutional protection typically associated with trial proceedings rather than the pre-trial context of police interrogations. In the context of custodial interrogations and the admissibility of statements, the focus is primarily on ensuring that suspects are aware of their rights, particularly the rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present during questioning. These rights are established under the Miranda warning, which aims to protect suspects against self-incrimination.

The right to face accusers relates more to the trial phase, where a defendant can confront witnesses and challenge the evidence presented against them in a court of law. While essential for ensuring fairness in legal proceedings, it does not directly influence the admissibility of statements made during custodial questioning. Thus, it is not a requirement for a statement to be admissible in court after a suspect has been interrogated.