Norseman said:You can't use it to get useful information.
"Nearly forty years ago, . . . . - when McCain was held captive in a North Vietnamese prison camp - some of the same techniques were used on him. And - as McCain has publicly admitted at least twice - the torture worked!"
In his 1999 autobiography, "Faith of My Fathers," McCain describes how he was severely injured when his plane was shot down over Hanoi - and how his North Vietnamese interrogators used his injuries to extract information.
"Demands for military information were accompanied by threats to terminate my medical treatment if I did not cooperate," he wrote.
"I thought they were bluffing and refused to provide any information beyond my name, rank and serial number, and date of birth. They knocked me around a little to force my cooperation."
The punishment finally worked, McCain said. "Eventually, I gave them my ship's name and squadron number, and confirmed that my target had been the power plant."
source
Say I have been charged and on bail for a crime I haven't committed, and only I know for sure, 100%, a witness has lied about information which has incriminated me. I could justify to myself putting pressure on the witness in the best way I see fit, to make sure a miscarriage of justice doesn't occur. I don't think a scenario like this is ever likely to happen to me, but if a person is prepared to play 'dirty' to take away your freedom, you'd be stupid not to weigh up all your options.
Let's say you do that. How does anyone know if the witness is telling the truth when you torture them, or just what you want them to say?
I'm not saying it should be legal for me to use methods to make them change their mind or not turn up, in fact it definitely shouldn't be legal. I'm just saying if I know they are definitely lying and incriminating me or framing me, then I could easily *justify to myself* doing whatever it takes to make sure a miscarriage of justice doesn't happen, especially if it saves 25 years of my life being taken away from me for something I haven't done. The question was could I ever justify torture, and yes I could in these very specific unlikely circumstances.
Ok, so let's say you decide to torture a witness who you know is lying, in order to prove your innocence. Let's assume you record their confession. How does the jury/judge know whether or not the witness was telling the truth when you tortured them, or just saying what you forced them to say? How does torturing them "make sure a miscarriage of justice doesn't happen"?
I doubt it. If you tortured someone, I think they would do everything in their power to make sure you never got out of prison. Particularly if they're already lying to get you into prison.
No, but if ever there were two cases that I would have to think really hard about it would be Hitler and Bin Laden.