Obtaining “Confessions” by Lies, Trickery and Deceipt
BY Herschel Smith18 years, 3 months ago
The North County Times has this update on a case that I have discussed before:
TIKRIT, Iraq — The U.S. Army opened a hearing Tuesday to determine whether four American soldiers must stand trial for allegedly murdering three Iraqis during a raid where they claimed they were under orders to “kill all military-age males.”
Staff Sgt. Raymond L. Girouard, Spc. William B. Hunsaker, Pfc. Corey R. Clagett, and Spc. Juston R. Graber are accused of murder and other offenses in the May 9 shooting deaths near Samarra, 60 miles north of Baghdad.
Girouard, Hunsaker and Clagett are also accused of obstruction of justice for allegedly threatening to kill another soldier if he told authorities what happened.
All four are members of the 3rd Battalion, 187th Infantry Regiment, 101st Airborne Division and have been jailed in Kuwait since they were arrested in June. They were moved to Tikrit, the division headquarters, for the Article 32 hearing, the military equivalent of a grand jury proceeding.
The hearing, which is expected to last several days, opened with testimony from two investigators who questioned the soldiers when the allegations surfaced last month.
Later on down the article there is this little nugget of gold:
The investigator acknowledged that he and his colleagues sometimes resort to “lies, trickery or deceit” to extract confessions.
I have commented before in Hamdania Marines and the Biblical Rules for Evidence concerning how evidence is obtained and what constitutes admissible evidence, so I won’t rehearse what was said in that post. However, I will point out that lies, trickery and deceipt is still lies, trickery and deceipt, no matter what the reason or supposed justification. Here is how it works. “Son, we have signed confessions from two others at the scene who told us exactly what you did, and this being a death penalty case, you will be executed unless you cooperate with us. If you confess to this crime, we think we can get you life in prison, parolled at 30 years, rather than the death penalty.” To which the individual agrees to the confession under counsel from his lawyer.
The only thing is that the statement that they had two other confessions was a lie. There are people in prisons who are guilty, and who were placed in prison by tactics like this, and who in fact deserve to be in prison. Then there are people who are in prison, and who confessed to a crime, and who are in fact not guilty — and they were placed in prison using tactics like this. This is true in civilian cases and military cases.
The practice is immoral. Period. It might be legal and ethical. But there is a difference between something being allowed in the sight of the law and something being good and righteous.
This practice is not good and righteous. Testimony should be given in front of everyone, without compulsion, and always corroborated by two or more witnesses. Again, repeating the point in my earlier post on the Hamdania Marines, the value of confessions in the western Judeo-Christian tradition was never to convict. It was always merely to corroborate. To use lies, trickery and deceipt to obtain alleged “confessions” is the prosecution playing God. It is the government deciding that the individual is guilty and then using whatever tactics effect the desired outcome (i.e., conviction). In the U.S., we are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. Coerced confessions accomplish nothing towards proving anything.
No comments yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment