Deception by the Investigating Officer in the Investigative, Interrogative, and Testimonial Processes
Deception is a deliberate act to mislead people involved in criminality. Deception acts as a balance between disclosing enough information that satisfies the interrogator while hiding any information that can lead to detection. Interrogators control the information and impression management to maximize the detection of deception. The strategy of deception prepares and recounts fictitious accounts of a target event. Investigators rely on deception as a chief tool to lure culprits to give them facts related to crimes. Police interrogators often rely on psychological procedures that use deception as a key component. The interrogation procedures encourage rational people to make rational decisions in the context of modern police interrogation.
The evolution of psychological methods influence rational people alter the earlier decision given. In this case, the investigators employ tactics that alter the suspect’s perception given the situation. The police interrogators have the capacity of altering the suspect subjective reality by distorting or fabricating the information. The daunting process of interrogation results in confession since the suspect has conviction that the situation is hopeless. The modern interrogators have relentless effort that moves suspects to confess. As honest reporters endeavor to supply information, the deceptive reporters accurately repeat the lie script in the investigative interview. The police enforcement employs the Assessment Criteria Indicative of Deception (ACID) to facilitate detection in their investigative interviews (Colwell 2007).
A recent criminology report reveals that fabricated responses are shorter and have less supporting detail than true responses. This report continues that lying is more demanding than honest reporting and liars put extra effort to control their speech. In the course of the interview, the deceiver bases responses on the lie script rather than recounting an original event. The lie script allows the interrogators to reduce their demands and to appear composed in their provision of information while they conceal information that leads to detection.
These psychological methods of interrogation are influential and once permitted to continue will have demoralizing effect in the society. This is because they produce confessions full of lies since they convince innocent suspects that the situation is hopeless as wee as the guilty (Colwell 2007). Once there is solid alibi in a case, interrogators use the alibi in fabrication to persuade the suspect of an airtight situation. When a case lacks solid proof interrogator relies on deception and interpersonal dominance to gain a confession.
Interrogation has the Pre admission and the Post admission narrative phase. The Pre admission phase alters the suspect decision to deny any responsibility on a criminal activity. During the Post narrative phase, the police employ tactics to shift the suspect from denial to admission. In this phase, there is an establishment of accurate information. The innocent and the guilty have to consent to the police interrogation since they expect to emerge safe and sound. In the process of interrogation, the interrogator strives to convince the suspect that all matters are in their best interest. The interrogator uses insidious nonthreatening pretext to organize the suspect background information. After obtaining information, the interrogator shifts the style by pointing out flows as regards contradiction in the flow of information. The interrogator has sufficient training to interrupt any exculpatory evidence offered by the suspect.
The Ethics of Interrogation Deception
The practice of lying has endorsement from the law and stands to present ethical challenges. The police officers encourage deception existence and work to promote it. Deception enables the police officers to protect them against the criminals. Some form of deception is unacceptable ethically. These forms permanently destroy the officer’s credibility.
The police enforcement often lies and acts in deceptive ways to manipulate innocent people in the society (DeClue 2005). These officers lie to suspects about witnesses in their attempt to learn the engagements of criminal activities. The actions of engagement such as the lie detecting technology indicate deception on the suspects. Certain circumstances require the officers to maintain integrity since they represent the law and the criminal justice system.
The nature of work carried out by the police call for the use of moral and intellectual practices in the society. The police enforcements apply ethics to build their moral character. The officers also use moral reasoning to identify problems and get balance about their consciousness. When an officer chooses to use force, the officer has to act within the boundaries of the legal framework. In the modern society, there is a high restriction on the use of force to subvert violence. The only limitation on the use of force is during self defense mechanism. The use of force is a type of domination and control method. Other methods include persuasion by using deception. In this method, the police maintains claim to the authority (Colwell 2007).
The law enforcement is fully aware of its duty and responsibilities to the public. Most of them live up to the highest standards of their professional line of duty. The law enforcement officers represent the government and are trusted and required to work within the law. Their duties range from ensuring the rights of all to liberty, safeguarding property and lives keeping the peace and ensuring justice and equity. There usually no conflict between the code of ethics and how law enforcement is really conducted, this is because the law enforcement officers carry out their responsibilities with impartiality. They also obtain cooperation from the public. The law enforcement officers conduct themselves in way that inspires respect and confidence.
Law enforcement officers stumble upon challenging tasks of making judgments of deception and truth on a daily basis. Officers face veracity of claims about the different whereabouts. For instance, when someone peddles drugs, innocent people are subject to assault to reveal the criminal activity. This is just a tip of the iceberg of what the law enforcement officers face in their line of duty.
Their decisions are essential concerning the truth of the suspects’ statement as it has tremendous consequences. Despite the essential role of deception detection in their line of duty, empirical research shows that enforcement officers are having a difficult time in detecting deception. Although experts assert that, the process of lie detection is a matter of chance. Studies have shown physical behavior and nonverbal communication, play an essential role in detecting deception.
Physical Behavior and nonverbal Communication in Detecting Deception
The chances of detecting deception under non-verbal and physical communication depend on the content supplied or the nonverbal behaviors leaked by the subject. The key assumption in the hope of detecting deception from lying person is when the person enters into a psychological state, which may differ, from the state when the person is telling the truth. The psychological states assume both the nonverbal and the verbal channels. The manual on criminal interrogation and confessions, states that liars place their hands over their mouth and display unnatural posture changes (DeClue 2005). Intriguingly, none of these traits has been efficient and reliable in detecting deception.
The most important role in detecting deception is focusing on the facial expression of the emotion. This is because both the facial and emotional are involuntary and are known to be associated with deception. It is essential for investigators to look out for this signs; this is because some of them are what expert’s term as micro expressions. This are fleeting expressions of concealed emotions, that happen so fast in a blink of an eye as fast as 1/15 of a second (Alpert 2009). Some of these expressions are hard to identify for the ordinary persons, it takes trained investigators to spot them. In most interrogation rooms there is mostly a video recorder, this is because most evaluations are done by slow motion videotape to try revealing the nonverbal expressions.
Facial expression is universal regardless people’s culture; ethnicity, nationality, nationality, and gender. This is to imply people express their faces in the same way. Learning to read those means that the law enforcement officers have a bigger window into the different suspects they encounter. This is because the facial expression is a powerful tool as it is a universal language. The other essential role in non-verbal and non-communication tool is the emotional clues, lies are known to generate emotions, and these emotions may range from pleasure and excitement, to the fear of being caught to feelings of guilt. Alpert (2009) asserts that emotions tend to manifest themselves in the tone, facial expressions this is reliable traits in to identify emotional states.
Another non-communicational element that is essential is avoidance. It is worth noting that the most obvious way to detect deception behavior in someone is through his or her avoidance or direct contact with the interrogating officer. When most convicts encounter interrogation and pressure to direct contact, they act out in anger and run away. By doing this the deceptive person will not have to deal with what they have done. When a convict is guilty and is deceptive avoidance is their best option to postpone in having to deal with that issue.
The undercover operations and the deceptive police practices are unlikely to stop. It is unlikely that the courts will subvert the use of deception to seek out the truth during an interrogation. There is need for checks to ensure that officers do not slip into the malicious deceptive misconduct. The officers must uphold the values of professional law enforcement and must maintain high ethical standards.
References
Alpert, G. P., & Noble, J. J.(2009).Lies, True Lies, and Conscious Deception: Police Officers and the Truth. Police Quarterly, 12(2), 237-254.
Colwell, K. (2007).Assessment Criteria Indicative of Deception (ACID):an integrated system of investigative interviewing and detecting deception. Journal of Investigative Psychology & Offender Profiling, 4(3), 167-180.
DeClue, G. (2005).Psychological consultation in cases involving interrogations and confessions. Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 33(3), 313-358.
