Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
He may present the existing evidence to the offender in a way that makes the guilt appear more certain than it perhaps is, or if he enhances the confidence in the evidence, this could be an effective and acceptable approach to elicit a confession. Coercion and lies, however, should not be an acceptable interrogative practice.
In another case in 1987, detectives lied to Florida resident Thomas Sawyer about the presence of physical evidence at the crime scene. They told the man that they found his hair and clothing fibers on the murder victim's body. After spending 14 months in jail awaiting trial, Sawyer's coerced confession was suppressed and he was exonerated in 1989.
Granted, the ramifications of not finding the murderer are severe. There are two things to consider when dealing with an accused person....
If evidence is not clear and he is the real offender, letting him go risks the possibility of a repeat offense. If he is not the real offender and he is imprisoned without clear evidence then an innocent person is being punished. The second would be crueler. Deception should not be used in order to avoid the possibility of a false confession. Imprisoning an innocent man is more of a crime than not imprisoning a guilty man and therefore, investigators should not force an accused to make a confession that is false.
There are other more reliable ways to prove an accused guilt, which should be exhausted before considerations for interrogative deception should be made. In conclusion, deception should be based on a substantial amount of incriminating evidence and not on clear lies as in the two cases presented above.
In another case in 1987, detectives lied to Florida resident Thomas Sawyer about the presence of physical evidence at the crime scene. They told the man that they found his hair and clothing fibers on the murder victim's body. After spending 14 months in jail awaiting trial, Sawyer's coerced confession was suppressed and he was exonerated in 1989.
Granted, the ramifications of not finding the murderer are severe. There are two things to consider when dealing with an accused person. If evidence is not clear and he is the real offender, letting him go risks the possibility of a repeat offense. If he is not the real offender and he is imprisoned without clear evidence then an innocent person is being punished. The second would be crueler. Deception should not be used in order to avoid the possibility of a false confession. Imprisoning an innocent man is more of a crime than not imprisoning a guilty man and therefore, investigators should not force an accused to make a confession that is false.
There are other more reliable ways to prove an accused guilt, which should be exhausted before considerations for interrogative deception should be made. In conclusion, deception should be based on a substantial amount of incriminating evidence and not on clear lies as in the two cases presented above.
These individuals are at risk of either confessing to crimes they did not commit or otherwise compromising their rights by virtue of inappropriate police interrogation techniques (Gudjonsson, 2003), a fact that has increasingly been recognized by the courts in their evaluation of the constitutionality of the interrogation methods that were used by police during their confinement preparatory for trial (Kinports, 2007). Conclusion Taken together, the research indicated that police interrogation remains
The court ruled that the police impaired her free choice by going beyond the evidence connecting her to the crime and introducing a completely extrinsic consideration in the form of an empty but plausible threat to take away something to which she and her children would otherwise be entitled." (DiPietro, 1) It is conceivable that this could be drawn on as a cause for inadmissibility of evidence yielded by the
Confessions and Interrogations The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees, under its "due process" clause, protection from the use of involuntary confessions. A confession is considered to be involuntary if the confession was not obtained from a rational intellect and a free will. ("Confessions") In other words, a person must consciously know what they are confessing to as well as freely admit to it. This definition includes a prohibition
Police Misconduct Case Study The district attorney declines to press charges and both juveniles are released. They flee the jurisdiction and are never found. Your partner is brought before a police investigation Board and suspended from the Department after 20 years service. Justification for Answer Choice #1 The District Attorney (DA) had no choice but to drop the charges and release the suspects because my partners actions apparently violated one of the most
, Skolnick and Fyfe, and Walker, that conclude racial discrimination has been found in several policing duties, facilitated by police discretion, including shootings, use of force, arrests, street stops, offense charging, search and seizure, and equality of coverage. Police discretion allows for this discrimination to occur. Skogan and Frydl (2004) concur that police discretion is an increased concern, in relation to racial profiling and discrimination. The authors surmise that pro-active special
Ethics in Law Enforcement "Sometimes [police officers] may, and sometimes may not, lie when conducting custodial interrogations. Investigative and interrogatory lying are each justified on utilitarian crime control grounds. Police are never supposed to lie as witnesses in the courtroom, although they may lie for utilitarian reasons similar to those permitting deception & #8230;" (Skolnick, et al., 1992) Is it ethical for law enforcement officers to use deception during the interrogation process?