Ethics during the interviewing and interrogation process in the Criminal Justice System (Term Paper Sample)

Ethics during the interviewing and interrogation process in the Criminal Justice System Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Course Title Instructor’s Name Date Introduction The field of criminal justice has been plagued with ethical questions since its inception. The practice of interviewing and interrogating suspects has been a topic of concern for many, as the line between what is and is not ethical can often be blurry. The interviewing and interrogation of suspects is a critical process. However, this process is fraught with potential ethical dilemmas and concerns. One such concern is the question of wrongful convictions, which is one of the most detrimental effects of unethical interrogations. A failure of justice is another term for it. Concerns have been raised about lies, trickery, and deceit. Investigators have had to tread a fine line between being persistent in their inquiries. They have been called out for being overly zealous in their refusal to give up on a case that should have been dismissed for lack of sufficient evidence. Investigators may be predisposed to believe that a particular suspect is guilty based on their personal biases or preconceived notions about the case. This can result in investigators pushing for a confession from the suspect, even if they are not actually guilty of the crime. This can have disastrous consequences for both the suspect and the criminal justice system as a whole. Wrongfully convicted suspects can spend years in prison or even face the death penalty based on false confessions. Furthermore, when investigators resort to unethical tactics to get a confession from a suspect, it casts doubt on all confessions obtained during the interview and interrogation process. On that note, this piece will major in some of the ethical questions that exist within the interviewing and interrogation process in the United States criminal justice system. Description of the problem or issue The criminal justice system is constantly under scrutiny. One of the most common areas of critique is the interview and interrogation process, which often leads to wrongful convictions. This process is fraught with ethical questions, such as whether or not law enforcement officials are allowed to use deception in order to get a suspect to confess. In the criminal justice system, the end often justifies the means. This is most commonly seen in the interrogation and questioning of suspects. In order to get information that may lead to the arrest and conviction of a criminal, law enforcement officers may use various methods—some of which may be ethically questionable. One such approach assumes a utilitarian model. This approach holds that the end goal (the arrest and conviction of a criminal) is so important that any means (including questionable methods) are justified in achieving it. This approach is often used in interrogation, where officers use any tactic they can—including violence, threats, lies, tricks, and intimidation—to get a suspect to confess. Another ethical controversy in interrogation is the question of race. Studies have shown that black suspects are more likely to be interrogated than white suspects, even when they have the same level of involvement in a crime. This raises questions about racial profiling and the unequal treatment of minorities in the criminal justice system. Lastly, there are questions about the effectiveness of certain interrogation methods. Some methods, such as torture, are widely considered ineffective and can even lead to false confessions. This has raised ethical questions about their use in law enforcement. Literature Review The deceptive interrogation practices used by law enforcement are ethically questionable and can often be quite damaging to the suspect’s mental state. The most common of these tactics is known as the “false confession technique,” which is when the interrogator makes it appear as though the suspect has already confessed to the crime. This can be done by falsely stating that incriminating evidence has been found or even by planting evidence in the suspect’s room. Other deceptive practices used by interrogators include making misleading statements about the consequences of a confession, lying about the strength of the evidence against the suspect, and pressuring the suspect to confess. These tactics are often used to get suspects to waive their Miranda rights or make incriminating statements. The ethical challenges of interviewing and interrogating in the CJ system are vast and far-reaching. For instance, there is the question of how to build trust and rapport with a suspect or defendant. This is especially tricky in light of the fact that many defendants view the interviewing and interrogation process as hostile and threatening ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Brimbal","given":"Laure","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Kleinman","given":"Steven M","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Oleszkiewicz","given":"Simon","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Meissner","given":"Christian A","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"SJ, Barela, MJ, Fallon, G., Gaggioli, JD Ohlin,(Eds.), Interrogation and torture: Integrating efficacy with law and morality","id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]},"page":"141-196","title":"Developing rapport and trust in the interrogative context: An empirically-supported and ethical alternative to customary interrogation practices","type":"article-journal"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=d81a3566-1f66-4d41-9d06-77c431c4f02e"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"(Brimbal et al., 2019)","plainTextFormattedCitation":"(Brimbal et al., 2019)","previouslyFormattedCitation":"(Brimbal et al., 2019)"},"properties":{"noteIndex":0},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}(Brimbal et al., 2019). Research denotes that establishing trust between interviewer and interviewee is a far better option than taking an aggressive stance and trying to pressure a confession out of the subject. Deceptive interrogation practices are ethically questionable and can often be quite damaging to the suspect’s mental state. Research has consistently demonstrated that establishing an atmosphere of safety and trust leads to more accurate information, as participants feel secure and comfortable enough to share it. One approach that has been found to be particularly effective in this regard is the use of rapport-building strategies, such as active listening. These strategies create an environment where people feel like they can speak freely and honestly, which increases the chances of them providing truthful information. In addition, empathy on the part of the interviewer can go a long way in getting the participant to open up about their experience and potentially provide useful insight into the issues at hand ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"ISBN":"1611638569","author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Norris","given":"Robert J","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Bonventre","given":"Catherine L","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Acker","given":"James R","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"id":"ITEM-1","issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]},"publisher":"Carolina Academic Press North Carolina","title":"When justice fails: causes and consequences of wrongful convictions","type":"book"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=1665209a-0dff-4957-839b-f8c4a7aff89c"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"(Norris et al., 2018)","plainTextFormattedCitation":"(Norris et al., 2018)","previouslyFormattedCitation":"(Norris et al., 2018)"},"properties":{"noteIndex":0},"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}(Norris et al., 2018). The Hayley and Ray Bull study explored US 418 jail inmates’ perspectives on police interrogation. The four factors that emerged from the study were Dominance/Control, Humanity/Integrity, Sympathy/Perspective-Taking, and Rapport. The most concerning factor was Dominance/Control, which raised ethical concerns. This factor involved using intimidation and threats and focusing on obtaining a confession at any cost. It was clear from the inmates’ responses that this approach does not produce reliable or accurate information and often leads to false confessions. The study raises a number of ethical issues with respect to the interviewing and interrogation process in the criminal justice system. In particular, their finding of a strong emphasis on dominance and control in police interrogations indicates that certain interview techniques may be perceived as unethical by suspects, potentially leading to unreliable evidence or other detrimental outcomes ADDIN CSL_CITATION {"citationItems":[{"id":"ITEM-1","itemData":{"ISSN":"1068-316X","author":[{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Cleary","given":"Hayley M D","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""},{"dropping-particle":"","family":"Bull","given":"Ray","non-dropping-particle":"","parse-names":false,"suffix":""}],"container-title":"Psychology, Crime & Law","id":"ITEM-1","issue":"2","issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]},"page":"157-170","publisher":"Taylor & Francis","title":"Jail inmates’ perspectives on police interrogation","type":"article-journal","volume":"25"},"uris":["http://www.mendeley.com/documents/?uuid=5d69d483-3fe1-4809-a2a6-5c2b159f0aa9"]}],"mendeley":{"formattedCitation":"(Cleary & Bull, 2019)","plainTextFormattedCitation":"(Cleary & ...