In the modern world of criminal justice, the effectiveness of the interview and interrogation techniques has to do with the main things in bringing fair and just results. This paper aims to delve into the intricacies of interview and interrogation techniques, as outlined in “Smart Talk: “Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation” by D.K. Gosselin, which mainly provides insight into these procedures’ roles in the criminal justice system. The primary argument of this paper is to affirm that employing innovative and ethical interview and interrogation techniques not only improves the effectiveness of the investigation but also protects justice and human rights.
To accomplish the goal of this paper, the paper will proceed as follows: Initially, it will give a detailed explanation of the background of the interview and interrogation, where the historical details and evolution of these techniques in the criminal justice system will be highlighted (Gosselin & Internet Archive, 2007). Next, the paper will illustrate actual case studies to illustrate the importance and consequences of the application of effective interrogation and interview approaches.
The paper will also assess the existing data and research findings and therefore, analyze if they can be used to strengthen the case that the criminals’ interrogation strategies are practical and lead to good outcomes of the investigations (Meissner et al., 2012). However, it should instead be considered that negative points and various ethical challenges are connected with some types of these methods.
The paper will chart ethical considerations and difficulties by dealing with the opposite positions. Eventually it will give the solutions to this problem, but prior to it is desirable to outline the measures for decreasing the risk of torture and for increasing the efficiency of interviews and interrogations (Carter & Abeles, 2009). Uplifting conclusion will touch upon an array of suggested measures and tips that can lead toward modification of interviews and interrogation methods conforming to ethical standards and enhancing their applicability in the criminal justice realm.
Its goal is to appeal to makers of policies for the adoption of modern and ethical interrogation an interview method, which play indispensable role in the criminal justice system and seek to bring out the truth and protect the individual rights as well (Acker, 2018).
The interrogation of suspects in high-profile criminal operations, which include them, such as terrorism cases, has been selected as a case example to be analyzed in the present paper. These examples often highlight the complicated and intricate goals the interrogators are faced with while dealing with the protection of rights of individuals, thereby offering unique scenarios, which can be used to test the efficiency and ethics of an interrogation process (Crelinsten, 2013).
Among the counter arguments of the central opinion on the use of the advanced interviewing and interrogation techniques is the issue of applicability to the cases of coercion or manipulation (Vrij et al., 2017) during interrogation. In our conception privacy matters are raised by particular methods of interrogation as they may pose danger to the suspect’s rights and liberty.
Finally, this essay has delved into the multifaceted terrains of interviewing and interrogating in criminal justice system. The power to get more complete information in shorter term periods when not using these techniques correctly can be abused, so safeguards are needed to guarantee the ethics and rights of crime suspects. Moving ahead, it is paramount for executionists and policymakers to concentrate on the improvement of the algorithms and appropriate step-by-step implementation, so as to ensure their utility and responsibility in the criminal justice sphere. Thus, by this we are able to aspire towards a system which is not just investigative and punishing but one that also respects and upholds all the rights and dignity of the people involved .
References
Acker, J. R. (2018). Reliable Justice: Advancing the Twofold Aim of Establishing Guilt and Protecting the Innocent. Albany Law Review, 82, 719. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/albany82&div=28&id=&page=
Carter, L. A., & Abeles, N. (2009). Ethics, prisoner interrogation, national security, and the media. Psycnet.org; Psychological Services 6(1),11–21. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0011116
Crelinsten, R. (2013). Counterterrorism. In Google Books. John Wiley & Sons. https://books.google.co.ke/books?hl=en&lr=&id=_2_hJQU-dIQC&oi=fnd&pg=PT5&dq=High+profile+cases+often+highlight+the+complexities+and+challenges+associated+with+balancing+investigative+imperatives+with+the+protection+of+individual+rights
Gosselin, D. K., & Internet Archive. (2007). Smart talk : contemporary interviewing and interrogation. In Internet Archive. Upper Saddle River, N.J. : Pearson Education. https://archive.org/details/smarttalkcontemp0000goss
Meissner, C. A., Redlich, A. D., Bhatt, S., & Brandon, S. (2012). Interview and interrogation methods and their effects on true and false confessions. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 8(1), 1–53. https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2012.13
Vrij, A., Meissner, C. A., Fisher, R. P., Kassin, S. M., Morgan, C. A., & Kleinman, S. M. (2017). Psychological Perspectives on Interrogation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(6), 927–955. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617706515