INVESTIGATING OFFICER DECEPTION

Deception by the Investigating Officer in the Investigative, Interrogative, and Testimonial Processes

Table of Contents

Introduction2

Discussion and Analysis3

Carrying out a criminal investigation:3

Practices of Deception on part of the investigation officers:4

Conclusion6

References7

Deception by the Investigating Officer in the Investigative, Interrogative, and Testimonial Processes

Introduction

For more than 100 years, deception has been used as a valuable tool within the investigative reporting. Although, deception is observed to be very useful in assisting the investigative officers (for meeting their functions of a investigation, interrogation and within the testimonial process), when being used in the detection of evidence, such material, which is in the interest of the public and the law enforcement agencies like police. In those situations, deception is seen to be applied by the approval of the audience. Deception is observed when an individual abstains from acting, or deliberately acts, with the aim of leading a person or a group of persons to maintain or form such a belief, which is false. Ethically deception is an act, which is questionable and this denotes that if enough justification is not present the act of deception would be termed as prohibited in ethical context (Elliott & Charles, 1992). Crime investigation, suspect interrogation and testimonial process are vital components of the crime control function of the police within which the investigation officers also come, and with the continued growth of policy in the American society, comprehending what investigative officers do and the way the execute their duties becomes more imperative (Shuy, 1997). This paper discusses deception by the investigating officer in the investigative, interrogative, and testimonial processes along with arguing on the issue that whether it is ethical to lie to obtain to the truth. In addition to this the paper discusses the roles that physical behavior and nonverbal communication play in detecting deception and whether there occurs a conflict between the code of ethics for an investigative officers.

Discussion and Analysis

Within the United States role of the investigative officer is by and large not well understood and is a controversial one. The investigative office got criticized in the past for a number of things including deception while investigating / interrogating / process of testimonial, resistance to change, illegal practices, corruption and abuse of power. On the contrary, these investigative officers even received praise as scientists, professionals, artists and heroes. Even though the role of investigative officer got extremely famous within the media and fictional literature, empirical studies designed for offering a much precise portrayal of that role is both outdated and limited (Cole, 1995).

Carrying out a criminal investigation:

Psychologists have researched the tactics and procedures used by investigative officers in criminal investigation, suspect interrogation and testimonial procedures. They have assisted the investigative officers and produced psychological knowledge for assisting in techniques of investigation, interrogation and testimonial processes like identification of eyewitnesses, describing the crime scenes and cross-examining suspects. For instance, an investigation officer sequentially shows a witness of a crime scene, 8 pictures of the suspects, rather than showing those 8 pictures simultaneously or at the same time for reducing ...