You watch the process of interrogation conducted by a police department. All interrogations are videotaped. However, you are bothered that during some interrogations, suspects are presented with concoctive evidence as a basis for dealing with resistance and denial. But one of the district attorneys assures you that this is legal.
You watch one interrogation of a rape and murder suspect. After the initial interrogation, he is told that he is a suspect in a rape and murder case and that the police have an eyewitness who places him near the scene. (This is true.) The suspect is “Mirandized.” He waives his right to counsel by saying, “I didn’t do anything.” The officers ask him if he wants an attorney, and he says he does not. They show him many pictures of the crime scene and the victim and ask him what he was thinking about when he committed the crime. When the officers ask where he put the knife he used to commit the crime, he says, “I don’t remember.” Whenever he says he does not remember, they ask him to imagine what he must have done. After six hours of interrogation, he confesses to having committed the crime. He says, “I must have done it.” A confession is typed up, and he signs it. He is jailed with no option for bail.
In a minimum of 300 words, compare the interrogation techniques used by the officers with the standard professional practices of interrogators as described in your textbook.
In addition, with respect to the professional practices of interrogators, comment on the following:
Hi there! Click one of our representatives below and we will get back to you as soon as possible.