question about police interrogations?

I am writing a paper on false confessions and I know that it is illegal for police officers to give promises of leniency during an interrogation. For instance, the officer tells the suspect that if he confesses, the officer guarantees that the state will not seek the death penalty and the suspect will receive a life sentence, as opposed to death. I need to know the court case where this was decided so I can cite it in my paper.

2 Answers

Relevance
  • 9 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    A confession must be made "voluntarily."

    It's not necessarily "illegal" to give promises of leniency. It's just that promises of leniency tend to make a subsequent confession "involuntary," or "coerced."

    Whether a confession is voluntary depends on all of the surrounding circumstances of the confession, including promises of leniency and other police coercion.

    See Lynum v. Illinois, a 1963 Supreme Court decision, for a good discussion of involuntary confessions.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 3 years ago

    As a 40 twelve months veteran Police officer and previous homicide detective as nicely as an accessory college professor, i hit upon the concept for this task to be ridiculous. If the question have been approximately poorly carried out Police interrogations, or police interrogations in violation of Miranda and Escobedo, i ought to confirm some factor. yet to be silly sufficient to confirm Police interrogations as reliable/undesirable is ludicrous. I interrogated thousands of criminals alongside with dozens and dozens of Murderers and gotten probable thousands of robust, stable confessions that solved severe crimes. In 40 years, I easily have purely had ONE confession that I ever have been given suppressed by way of the Trial choose (and that i nevertheless disagree along with his opinion on that one, which replaced into over 25 years in the past). quite much all experienced investigators are nicely experienced in the appliance of 5th and 6th modification matters so as that we acquire reliable, legally admissible statements. definite there are poorly carried out interrogations. yet they're very uncommon (opposite to the opinion of the liberals and followers of the "Innocence challenge") i've got faith that there have been circumstances the place some harmless human beings have by some potential or yet another confessed to a minimum of something that they did no longer do, yet i'm advantageous it fairly is a lot rarer than you (or your professor) look to % to think of. clearly,. television does no longer help the well-known public get a reliable view of our interrogation approaches, yet no longer something on television is remotely on the edge of actual lifestyles. I won't answer your question. yet i will ask you one. as quickly as I easily have delivered closure to those who've had family viciously Murdered, how do I say that there is a foul area to that?

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.