Are police interview tactics moral?

[Autumnleaf]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6014022229458915912&q=&hl=en

 

[stan1980]

Sympathy bump

 

[stan1980]

Interesting video actually. He's only doing his job I suppose and from what I gather, he's not getting false confessions, just using sly tricks. If it gets results, it gets results.

I do find the cop in the video nauseating and arrogant though. He makes out like he's Columbo or something, but I bet there are a ton of people he hasn't managed to get confessions from. Probably has a selective memory. No doubt some will fall for his tricks, but not everyone is stupid enough to incriminate themselves, especially when there is a lack of evidence and you have your solicitor (attorney) sitting by your side.

 

[Steezie]

Police have, in my opinion, one of the hardest jobs in the world.

Many people do not like the cops and many more out and out hate the cops, refusing to help them whenever they ask for help from the community. They put their lives on the line for dirt pay and are expected to make the community safe but also to not be seen. Community members want the community to be protected but complain when theres too many cops around. They gotta deal with people being wise, lying, being tough guys.

I've read the police training manuals, the SWAT officer's manual, I've spoken with police officers and I have great respect for policemen.


Im used to dealing with LAPD and local sherrifs and I'd say about 90% of them are good people doing their best. 5% of them just dont care, they wanted to be out in South Central or Watts instead they got stuck with a crap desert town so they just do not care. 4% are crooked, and about 1% have some sort of massive issue they need to work out like racism, a problem with people who are younger etc etc

 

[Maren]

I'll go on record as saying some police interrogation tactics are not ethical. Of course, then the argument is brought up that since criminals are not ethical why should the police be?

The fact is that many, especially low income persons who can't afford a lawyer and don't realize to ask for one and the less intelligent or mature, are lied to by the police about the evidence and told that if they don't confess they will spend most of the rest of their life in jail. Sometimes this leads to false confessions based on the (sometimes false) promise that they will get a significantly reduced sentence. Depending on who you believe, either this is common or rare -- though we know it happens as there are many times that evidence has proven years later that the person who confessed could not have committed the crime.

 

[Steezie]

I'll go on record as saying some police interrogation tactics are not ethical.

The fact is that many, especially low income persons who can't afford a lawyer and don't realize to ask for one

Suspects are required to be notified that they can either call a lawyer of their choice or be provided a public defender. This is the law and can result in suspects getting sprung if they are not read their rights.

and the less intelligent or mature, are lied to by the police about the evidence and told that if they don't confess they will spend most of the rest of their life in jail.

Reasonable deception is an accepted method of police questioning. What you are describing is coercion and is not legally allowed by law.

 

[Maren]

Suspects are required to be notified that they can either call a lawyer of their choice or be provided a public defender. This is the law and can result in suspects getting sprung if they are not read their rights.

Actually, they are required to be Mirandized. I think there is little question that many do not understand or are in shock at being arrested to fully understand, especially with how little understanding of legal processes most citizens seem to have.

Reasonable deception is an accepted method of police questioning. What you are describing is coercion and is not legally allowed by law.

Actually, it has been ruled in courts that what I described is allowed and is not coercion. It is a major part of the plea bargaining system in the United States -- and it has been documented to be abused, allowing cops to get confessions (which have at times been proven to be false confessions) when they don't actually have the evidence to get a conviction. This article points this out (though it is talking about mandating tougher sentences), saying, "[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]In other words, in the name of getting tough, we've mandated tough sentences that are, nonetheless, not imposed. That's because they are more useful as guns to the heads of defendants to avoid trial." They appear to agree with you that it should be considered coercion, since they call it "a guns to the heads", but that it is legal.
[/SIZE][/FONT]

 

[clarksided]

Over the top physical abuse and forcing false confessions to increase your batting average is not ok.

Intimidating a suspect without actually harming them and lying to them about, for example, a friend giving them up to get them to confess, is perfectly ok.

 

[quatona]

I'll go on record as saying some police interrogation tactics are not ethical. Of course, then the argument is brought up that since criminals are not ethical why should the police be?

Of course, the argument is a moot point since we aren´t talking about criminals but about suspects here.

 

[mpok1519]

Cops have lied to my face before trying to get me to confess to something I had not done; he told me my friend had snitched me out and "gave me up" when I knew for a fact that my friend was not even in the same state that day.....the officer got fired after I filed a suit against them for wrongful prosecution.

cops do have a hard job; the thing is, they can make their job even more difficult by lying to law-abiding citizens.

 

[seeker777]

Cops have lied to my face before trying to get me to confess to something I had not done; he told me my friend had snitched me out and "gave me up" when I knew for a fact that my friend was not even in the same state that day.....the officer got fired after I filed a suit against them for wrongful prosecution.

cops do have a hard job; the thing is, they can make their job even more difficult by lying to law-abiding citizens.

Cops are allowed to lie, use deceit, trickery and subterfuge during an interview / interogation and the example you gave is also permitted.

Police can't use threats or inducements to obtain a confession.

I'm not sure why an officer would be fired for telling a lie in order to get a confession....further, police services are sued all the time, big services are likely served with law suits everyday...I would hazard a guess that there is a lot more to your story.

In Canada, the courts have pretty much ruled that police interviews where a confession is obtained will only be admitted as evidence if the interview was video / audio taped. This ruling came out about a year ago.

To answer the OP's question....yes, police tactics are ethical, moral and desperately needed. You would not believe the rights criminals are granted in Canada....it would shock the average America

So, yes, the laws are stacked against the police and victims.