Due Process Essay: What Is Gained Through Interrogation

Abstract:
This essay discusses what interrogation is and how it is used by officers. I discuss the approaches of interrogation and how officers should approach suspects in order to secure a voluntary confession. I also talk about the methods of interrogation and how they act can affect the outcome of an interrogation. I provided different examples of situation officers run into to provide a better visualize as well.

What is Gained through Interrogation?
What is Interrogation?
Interrogation is the consistent questioning of a suspect in order to receive a confession or information on a crime and can be obtained through both coercive and non-coercive techniques. Coercive techniques would be physical force, threats, depriving suspect

A confession can be involuntary when the individual is deprived of their rights through force or verbal brutality, such as threats. The second approach is the Sixth Amendment Approach which says that an individual’s rights are violated if incriminating responses are said after the individual as requested counsel. This is because some officers will continue to question or trick a suspect into confessing after they asked for a lawyer, therefore if counsel is requested anything said afterwards is inadmissible. Lastly, the third approach is the Miranda Approach which states two things; first being that if an individual is not in police custody, then the Miranda rights do not apply and what they say cannot be used against them because of free speech, and the second thing is if an officer interrogates a suspect and gets a confession, the confession is inadmissible in court if the officer failed to read the suspect their Miranda rights during arrest and

Officers can use either coercive or non-coercive methods of interrogation. Coercive techniques should be used the least because they can involve physical violence, threats, and more which cause faulty confessions. Multiple studies, “have shown how coercive interrogation techniques… increase the risk of false confessions” (French, 2019). This is because officers will go to the lengths of threating suspects lives, or their loved ones live or even holding suspects without food, water, or sleep. When these individuals are put into such bad situations, they will say anything to be free, even if it means incriminating themselves. However, the suspect can report afterwards how they did not want to confess and were forced to and because police station rooms are video recorded, the evidence will hold up in court. On the other hand, non-coercive techniques are mostly used and result in voluntary confessions. This is because when using non-coercive techniques, and officer will simply speak to the suspect and try to understand and relate to them to gain trust. By gaining their trust they are able to temporarily bond, which result in the suspect opening up and confessing. These confessions are admissible in court because no rights are violated in order to obtain the