NCJ Number
143635
Journal
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin Volume: 62 Issue: 7 Dated: (July 1993) Pages: 27-31
Date Published
1993
Length
5 pages
Annotation
While some courts may tolerate a police officer's use of lies, threats, and promises to elicit a suspect's confession, so long as they do not overcome the suspect's free will, other courts find the officer's use of such interrogative techniques per se violative of due process.
Abstract
Courts use a totality of the circumstances test to determine the degree of a defendant's vulnerability to interrogation and the voluntariness of any subsequent confession. Successful investigators will use only those tactics that are appropriate to the suspect and the circumstances by considering the suspect's background and personal characteristics including age, education, mental impairment, and physical condition. Based on its effect on voluntariness, an officer's deception can be categorized as lies that relate to a suspect's connection to the crime and trickery that introduces extrinsic considerations. The coerciveness of an officer's promise of leniency or collateral benefit is determined by considering several factors: whether the promise is proximate to the confession, whether the defendant relied on the promise, whether it was fulfilled, whether the accused solicited the promise, and whether the accused believed the officer had the authority to execute the promise. Courts view threats as inherently coercive and a significant factor that could render a confession.