Discuss deception in the following three processes: (a) investigative, (b) interrogative, and (c) testimonial. When might it be allowed/legal? When is it not?
p 4 THREE PROCESSES OF DECEPTION Deception has long been used in the detecting process of criminal cases There are three stages of deception during a detecting process which may have variations depending of the degree of the criminal process The three stages of detecting involve investigation , then interrogation and finally to testimonial . Law officers , such as policemen , generally employ deception in their detecting process . This involves tricking criminal during the investigative and interrogative stages , in to gather enough information to arrest a suspected criminal . Such type of deception often involves
some psychological approaches that facilitate the law officer to entrap a suspected individual of a particular crime It has been determined that such deceptive approach is more effective than physical and /or violent methods of capturing suspects and criminals . However , it is also sad to know that the people involved in the justice system , such as law officers , employ specific hoaxes all for the main reason of catching their culprit . Hence , the use of deception is seen as a paradox , because a law officer has to play some kind of scam in to catch another scam . Deception is generally allowed during the investigative stage of detection , but is less tolerated during interrogation and rarely suitable or accepted during court proceedings . Every stage of deception is associated with a corresponding rigid control measures . Testimonials during court hearings are performed under oath , hence the statements of an individual being examined are assumed to be true and no other statement should be falsified or forged . When a law officer does not pronounce the truth in court , he is still capable of providing a reason for his deception based on a substitute arrangement , such as when the law officer is operating as a witness to the prosecution and is not considering as the defendant at a court case . However , it is also required that the law officer is conscious of the rules of the court system that is has sworn to tell the truth during examination . No matter what the situation , law officers still do not tell the truth , especially when they are concerned that the justice system 's evaluation of the rules of police officers practices are not translated in the best possible way and such occurrence may hamper the law officer 's ability to perform during work
In investigative deception , law officers are allowed by the justice system to use deception and are actually trained by the police groups to lie (Chevigny , 1969 . This may be observed in detectives who have been taught to employ informers or even act as the informer when the case being investigated is associated with the presence of confiscation of illegal or smuggled items . At the justice system point of view , the degree of severity of arresting an individual carrying an illegal item is the same as the degree of severity of catching an individual who selling an illegal item . The same conditions are observed in cases of burglary , when law enforcers seldom catch a...
More Papers on process, officer, deception, processes, discuss
Customers Who Downloaded This Essay Also Viewed
Related searches on States, interrogative, Lego
- (b) studies
- sample papers on Lego
- courseworks on testimonial.
- testimonial analysis
- merits of
- disadvantages of deception
- advantages and disadvantages of allowed-legal
- investigating summary
- cause and effect of (A)
- investigative fallacies
- investigating test
- advantages of Interrogative
- processes. introduction