How would you feel if a judge sentenced you a life behind bars for something you didn’t commit? Many women accuse men of rape when they didn't rape anyone. There are a lot of cases that the "victim" chose a man from the police lineup that wasn’t her perpetrator. Before determining the person is guilty there should be a DNA test for the victim. The next paragraph will be talking about how this problem developed.
This issue drew up by people not paying attention to the DNA tests, by not interrogating the suspect fairly as well as by not punishing the accuser for making the untruthful accusation. There was a case that the suspect's mom, Karim, said: “He found it difficult to cope with the police investigation.” This desperate mother had said …show more content…
They think it should be the contrary, NPR’s Brian Duffy said “I understand the desire to call “a spade a spade” but it’s not for journalists to start labeling specific tactics unfair” on harsh interrogation. There is more chance that a suspect will tell you if he did it or not if there is peace because he will feel guilty, by making the environment hostile the suspect even if he’s innocent he might confess to something he didn’t do because of the amount of pressure. In another article called Common Interrogation Techniques by Julia Layton, she says “ The police are allowed to lie to a suspect to get him to confess” This is not fair. The suspect should be told the truth at all times. If the suspect isn’t intelligent enough to understand the questions he might get confused and say stuff that will make him look guilty. Another thing said by Julia is “ The manual also suggests that the suspect should be seated in an uncomfortable chair out of the reach of any controls” This is another reason the defendant would say things without thinking. The best place to think is somewhere comfortable where you can express your thoughts in the right way. This strategy the police officers use is mainly to get the suspect to confess even if he didn’t do it. It is by the justice system for the defendant to fail the set of questions. It only takes one wrong answer and all of the sudden you are guilty. The next paragraph will conclude this
This issue drew up by people not paying attention to the DNA tests, by not interrogating the suspect fairly as well as by not punishing the accuser for making the untruthful accusation. There was a case that the suspect's mom, Karim, said: “He found it difficult to cope with the police investigation.” This desperate mother had said …show more content…
They think it should be the contrary, NPR’s Brian Duffy said “I understand the desire to call “a spade a spade” but it’s not for journalists to start labeling specific tactics unfair” on harsh interrogation. There is more chance that a suspect will tell you if he did it or not if there is peace because he will feel guilty, by making the environment hostile the suspect even if he’s innocent he might confess to something he didn’t do because of the amount of pressure. In another article called Common Interrogation Techniques by Julia Layton, she says “ The police are allowed to lie to a suspect to get him to confess” This is not fair. The suspect should be told the truth at all times. If the suspect isn’t intelligent enough to understand the questions he might get confused and say stuff that will make him look guilty. Another thing said by Julia is “ The manual also suggests that the suspect should be seated in an uncomfortable chair out of the reach of any controls” This is another reason the defendant would say things without thinking. The best place to think is somewhere comfortable where you can express your thoughts in the right way. This strategy the police officers use is mainly to get the suspect to confess even if he didn’t do it. It is by the justice system for the defendant to fail the set of questions. It only takes one wrong answer and all of the sudden you are guilty. The next paragraph will conclude this