Home » Notes » Honesty Is the Best Policy: A Case for the Limitation of Deceptive Police Interrogation Practices in the United States

Honesty Is the Best Policy: A Case for the Limitation of Deceptive Police Interrogation Practices in the United States

PDF · Irina Khasin · Jul-11-2012 · 42 VAND. J. TRANSNAT'L L. 1029 (2009)

In the United States, police officers regularly employ deceptive interrogation tactics to extract confession evidence from suspects. Despite widespread recognition of the harm caused by police deception, courts in the United States have consistently condoned the practice, refusing to exclude confessions obtained through manipulative and deceitful means.  The British Parliament has recognized that deceptive police practices yield false confessions and, thus, wrongful convictions. The Police and Criminal Evidence Act of 1984 addresses this concern by establishing clear rules for the police to follow and by empowering courts to enforce those rules.  In evaluating the need for reform in American police interrogation policy, English law provides a valuable model for comparison.  Taking a cue from the English, this Note proposes the creation of a new legislative framework focused on the reliability of confession evidence.  The Note will argue that the new law should include guidelines for the police to follow in conducting interrogations and that those guidelines should prohibit the types of deceptive practices that lead to unreliable results.




Leave a Reply

ExpressO Top 10 Law Review

ANNOUNCEMENTS

We are pleased to announce the 2013-2014 VJTL New Members

Coming up:

The Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law hosted a symposium called “The Role of Non-State Actors in International Law” at Vanderbilt University Law School in February 2013.

The October issue of the Journal will showcase articles by distinguished symposium guests including:

  • Mr. Ian Smillie, “Blood Diamonds and Non-State Actors”
  • Professor Jean d’Aspremont, “Cognitive Conflicts and the Making of International Law from Empirical Concord to Conceptual Discord in Legal Scholarship”
  • Professor Peter J. Spiro, “Constraining Global Corporate Power: A Very Short Introduction”
  • Professor Suzanne Katzenstein
  • Professor Peter Margulies
  • Professor Harlan G. Cohen

 

Explore Other Vanderbilt Law Resources