Abuse In Interrogations

Abuse in interrogations Interrogations are a crucial element in convicting people. Their essentiality makes them a fruitful ground of discussion, offering opposing views on their mode of procedures. There is a difference in opinion on what measures, if any, must be put in order to protect the people from probable abuse during the interrogation process.
Police use many tactics to interrogate officials and civilians. Some of the techniques used are telling a story backwards, this method has been proven to, “produce twice as many details as recounting chronologically”(jacobson 2) this method also helps because “truth tellers tend to add and revise their stories overtime” (Jacobson 2). Other things that officers can do during an interrogation is “surprising you” this is a method used to determine if you are telling the truth, “if you ask them something unexpected they often
The Miranda laws, and Massiah laws, were put in place to help people being interrogated. These laws assure that their rights are not violated so the police do not overstep their boundaries in an interrogation. They clearly outline what is appropriate to do in an interrogation and what will happen if these rights are violated. Eve Primus clarifies what the Miranda laws, and Massiah laws did to protect the public. “Miranda and Massiah supplied more definite rules, and courts relied on them to do the heavy lifting in regulating police interrogation practices” (Primus 3). Although these laws helped to outline what is appropriate during an interrogation, time is an element that has lead these laws into decay. Currently the only law being implemented to protect anyone during an interrogation is the voluntariness test. Brandon Garrett describes the voluntariness test as, “forgiving and vague, case-by-case standard with no definite shape that, in practice, almost always resulted in the admission of suspects’ confessions”(Primus