The U.S. Supreme Court has made decisions to allow police officers to use deception during custodial interviews of suspects per case law Frazier v. Cupp, 1969 and Oregon v. Mathias on, 1977. Supportive decisions of deception has been made also in the State Court level per State v. Nightingale, 2012.
Deception during investigations does not mean a case to be solved by “whatever means necessary,” as the suspects have their civil rights. However, I do believe the deception and baiting a suspect during investigation and in custodial interviews, is a tool necessary to pursuant of solving a case. There has to be reasonable and prudent justification to use deception in relation to the case under investigation and it should be proportional. If such consideration is not given to the investigation methods and tactics, there is a danger of misusing the
On a situation of a child abduction where time is of an essence to recover the child unharmed, more aggressive approach to investigation and interrogations may be justified. Yet using the same level of deceit and trickery may not be reasonable during a minor hit and run accident with property damage only. Potential misuse of deceitful tactics can be come an issue if the investigator is overly focused on solving the offense and fails to take in consideration all circumstances …show more content…
The information obtained from a subject must be given knowingly and intelligently, meaning the subject must understand what they are doing when talking to the investigators and potentially providing a confession. It takes a lot of character, professionalism and ethics from an investigator to recognize and accept when a person is not able to produce truthful account of events and circumstance even when they’re attempting falsely to take responsibility of an offense they were initially suspect
Deception during investigations does not mean a case to be solved by “whatever means necessary,” as the suspects have their civil rights. However, I do believe the deception and baiting a suspect during investigation and in custodial interviews, is a tool necessary to pursuant of solving a case. There has to be reasonable and prudent justification to use deception in relation to the case under investigation and it should be proportional. If such consideration is not given to the investigation methods and tactics, there is a danger of misusing the
On a situation of a child abduction where time is of an essence to recover the child unharmed, more aggressive approach to investigation and interrogations may be justified. Yet using the same level of deceit and trickery may not be reasonable during a minor hit and run accident with property damage only. Potential misuse of deceitful tactics can be come an issue if the investigator is overly focused on solving the offense and fails to take in consideration all circumstances …show more content…
The information obtained from a subject must be given knowingly and intelligently, meaning the subject must understand what they are doing when talking to the investigators and potentially providing a confession. It takes a lot of character, professionalism and ethics from an investigator to recognize and accept when a person is not able to produce truthful account of events and circumstance even when they’re attempting falsely to take responsibility of an offense they were initially suspect