THE GOAL OF AN INTERROGATION IS TO DEVELOP EVIDENCE BY OBTAINING A CONFESSION OR AN ADMISSION FROM A SUSPECT.
The NYPD has begun videotaping suspects being questioned, this program has met with some resistance from veteran detectives who fear that suspects will not make statements when tapped. Your assignment is to read the below article pointing out the pros and cons of videotaping and also view the attached videos.
Then take part in the Discussion by commenting in depth on these items and also comment on two other students posts.
A) What was your reaction to the interrogation of young Michael Crow who was a suspect in the murder of his sister? Do you think it was child abuse or a valid interrogation?
B) Give your opinion concerning the idea of Taping all interrogations, is it a good because it will show how the evidence was obtained or bad because it will reduce statements made by suspects when they are told that the interrogation is being video tapped. The cons are highlighted in the article with the positive points listed below the negative statements.
In order to obtain the full 10 points your submission must be more than you agree or disagree, you have to give your reasons for your opinion,
Attached below are two video taped interrogations the first one is an example of Investigators interrogating a young murder suspect named Michael Crowe who is suspected of murdering his sister.
THE GOAL OF AN INTERROGATION IS TO DEVELOP A CERTAINTY OF GUILT BY OBTAINING A CONFESSION OR AN ADMISSION FROM A GUILTY SUSPECT.
The below brief video depicts an interrogation room and refusal by prisoner, which happens quite often.
NYPD:
Quizzing suspects to go to videotape to show cops don’t coerce confessions from suspects
BY Jonathan Lemire /
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER /
The NYPD is set to start videotaping interrogations of suspects, officials announced Thursday.
The program – which will begin in two of the department’s 76 precincts – is meant to counter claims that detectives coerce confessions from suspects. Prosecutors have long videotaped confessions. But former Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly previously said that recording interrogations was too expensive and cumbersome to be practical for the nation’s largest police department. But with improvements in digital technology, the practice – pushed by the American Bar Association – is now feasible, said NYPD spokesman Paul Browne. The city’s district attorneys have endorsed the project, but the detectives union opposes it.
Below Article by Criminal Defense team Easton,Thompson,Kasperek & Shiffrin
VIDEOTAPING INTERROGATIONS AND CONFESSIONS
Many law enforcement agencies continue to resist suggestions to videotape suspects’ interrogations and confessions, however as the benefits of recording become apparent, courts and legislatures are beginning to mandate such recording or, at minimum, penalize law enforcement for choosing not to record. Some of the arguments for and against, as well as law enforcement experiences with recording are discussed below.
Suspects won’t confess, or are less likely to confess if they’re being videotaped
Experience has shown that not only do suspects confess when being recorded, but do so with a frequency virtually identical to confessions that are not recorded (Police Experiences with Recording Custodial Interrogations, 19-23). Lt. Dan Grout, who heads the Minneapolis Police Department Homicide Unit notes that “we’re still getting as many confessions and convictions as we used to get” (Secret Interrogation Still the Norm, Democrat and Chronicle, 5/29/99). Even in those jurisdictions unlike New York that require consensual recording, suspects overwhelmingly consent to recording, then go on to confess. In New York, which allows surreptitious recording, the added impediment of obtaining suspect consent to recording is not present.
Incomplete recording or failure to record can be challenged
Since there is no obligation to record interrogations or confessions, no adverse inference could result from the inability to record where recording is not possible or practical (confession is obtained outside of the police station, recording not started until after questioning has begun, etc.). In these circumstances, a “good faith” exception, including a judicial instruction to juries that no adverse inference may be drawn from the failure to record might be expected, as it is consistent with the present state of the law. Of course, selective recording, or refusal to record at all is already challengeable and is routinely challenged; officers are by now familiar with this line of cross-examination, and would be in no worse position if some but not all interrogations (or some part but not the entire interrogation) were recorded.
If jurors see the ploys used to get confessions, they won’t convict
The overwhelming percentage of confessions don’t require resort to those tactics which, although permitted by law, may be offensive to a jury (lying about presence of suspect’s fingerprints on a murder weapon or the presence of a non-existent eyewitness identification, for example). Beyond that, concerns about the jury’s ability to appreciate the use of lawful interrogation techniques have proven to be unfounded. Margaret Talbot (True Confesssions), reports:
Whenever prosecutors in Hennepin County, Minnesota, use an interrogation tape that shows officers resorting to what might look like unorthodox methods, they have the officers take the stand and explain that their actions are accepted law-enforcement techniques. “Jurors understand,” says Amy Klobuchar, the county attorney. “And you have to balance the risk with the great advantage to the prosecution of having jurors be able to see a person confessing on videotape and see his demeanor right after the crime, which maybe a lot different from his cleaned-up appearance in court.”
Sometimes, she adds, there are advantages she would never have imagined: “My favorite story is of the time when we had a suspect who claimed to be blind. The police left the interrogation room for a few minutes, and the videotape caught him picking up a paper and starting to read it.” (A recent editorial in the Chicago Tribune noted a similar case in Kankakee County, Illinois, where the videotaping of interrogations is routine. A suspect who had repeatedly denied that he had killed a young woman was left alone in the room for a few minutes, during which he seemed to forget about the video camera and began singing, “Ding, dong, the wicked witch is dead …”).
