The ethics of deception during investigations

Ethics and Investigation: The Use of Deception

The following study identifies the ethical codes of conduct required in any form of service especially in the government and ways it can be breached. The particular situations under which such codes are violated include during criminal investigations and interrogations. This is discussed alongside the debate on whether it is ethically correct to use deception and lies during investigations. Finally, the paper gives a judgment on whether the investigators are justified to breach the code of ethics during investigative missions. A definition of two contrasting schools of thought known as the ontological ethics and deontological ethics is also given at the introduction section.

Introduction

Criminal investigation is one very complex field of administration globally. Ideally, the subject being dealt with touches on some of the most serious offences punishable according to the laws of any jurisdiction. As a result, culprits will likely prefer to die with the secrets of the crime rather than revealing them. It is common knowledge that dishonesty exists among the potential sources of information that can lead to possible arrests for those engaging in criminal activities. The members of the public who might be privy of the crucial information relating to the criminals will chose to remain silent and uncooperative to the investigators in most instances (Long, Fox, & York, 2007). Perhaps, they fear of reprisal attacks from the criminals. Deontological ethics dictates that people ought to act according to the set laws as a moral requirement without question. However, ontological ethics is based on the requirements of the deities (Braswell & McCarthy, 2008).

Role of lies in an investigation

In contemporary society, moral standards prohibit the use of lies under any circumstance. It is even considered a serious offence for people holding public offices to lie. For instance, an accused person when making submissions before a court of law is expected to speak the truth and only the truth. It is further taken to the point where one has to swear in front of the court that the information they are giving is correct to the best of their knowledge. In contrast, the prosecutor always works under explicit instructions to provide truthful information about the matters pertaining to the suspect.

However, despite the high requirements for speaking the truth in most of the society's forums, it is almost impossible to do away with the use of lies. Lying appears "prudent and acceptable" when one is forced to cooperate with the enemy as a way of protecting one's life. If a criminal were to coerce someone to divulge some information that may cause harm to the victim directly or to other third parties, the society would expect the victim in question to lie. Some scholars refer to it as "a white lie."

During police investigations as well, the police investigators are not only allowed to lie but they are encouraged to do so. A detective becomes very useful when he/she operates under a disguise. For the detective to disguise himself/herself effectively, lying is not an option. Most of the detectives will assume roles that are very different from their usual ones as well as speaking falsehoods to all around them in order to achieve the objective of disguise. Criminals are people always on the lookout for potential traps. They will eventually scrutinize every word that they hear. In order for the investigators to seize them, they have to employ sufficient lies (Ryberg, 2004).

Conflict between law enforcement and ethics

As one of the essential roles of the government, law enforcement is based on the principle that every offender should face justice as per the provisions of the set laws. It is within the means of the government arm concerned to use every possible mean to make the enforcement possible. Ethics has its provisions within which the people are expected to operate. Some of the requirements of ethics are humane treatment of all persons as well as honest and transparent ways of handling public matters. The objectives of law enforcement clash with those of ethics in most instances. During the process of enforcing the law, it is unexpected for the law enforcers to use excess force and inhumane treatment when making arrests. It is very likely for them to lie in order to achieve some set objectives because there will be no conflict between their areas of practice (Long, Fox, & York, 2007).

Detecting deception

During the investigation, deception applies to both sides of the bargain. The investigator will act deceptively in ordered to seize the culprit. In contrast, the culprit will behave deceptively in order to avoid being nabbed by the investigator. These two objectives hardly succeed simultaneously. One of the two will outsmart the other and eventually succeed. Detecting deception from the other partner is possible through the use non-verbal communication and physical behavior (Ryberg, 2004).