Why are Law Enforcement Officers permitted to lie or use any means necessary to acquire information?

Question

If I lie, it's a crime, if they lie, it's legal...and condoned. It gives the impression they are above the law. As far as that goes, they can make up any story/charge they want, at any time, and a judge will side with them 99.99% of the time

Answer 1

First let's clear up lying to police. There are several code sections that could apply depending on the circumstances. The 1st that comes to mind is delaying a peace officer in the performance of his duty [some states have a very similar law "obstruction of justice"]. If your lie makes his work more difficult because he now his to decipher the truth elsewhere or because he spends hours to get the truth, you have interfered with his job. Also, you cannot give a false indentification to a cop. Also, you cannot file a false report to a cop. Do NOT believe it is legal to lie to police officers or you will find yourself in court someday. Judges do not like defendants who lie to police because the police are the 1st step in the criminal justice system - the same system judges belong to so lying to cops is like lying to judges.

As for your question, it is inaccurate as written. Officers are NOT permitted to "use any means necessary to acquire information." There are many laws & restrictions as to how police can gather information. This issue has been before the Supreme Court many, many times.
They are permitted to lie to people though not in all cases. The Supreme Court has decided police officers can lie to people they question as long as the lie would not cause an innocent person to confess to a crime. If the lie causes a guilty person to confess, it is all right & perfectly legal.
Do you believe a suspect always tells the truth? And if the suspect is allowed to lie trying to avoid arrest or conviction, why shouldn't the police be allowed to lie trying to solve a crime?
Police may be able to "make up any story/charge they want" but they still must convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt to get a conviction. That is hard to do even with evidence. With just an officer's story, it is near impossible. AND if a defendant can prove the officer lied just to prosecute, then there are civil remedies.

Answer 2

The Supreme Court and other courts have clearly ruled after reviewing hundreds of cases that yes the police can use "trickery", lies and deception to lawfully obtain information on cases. If the officer oversteps those boundaries than the information can and will be thrown out of court. I always try to use examples so that civilians can understand why we do these things at times so here goes:
Lets say a relative was robbed in front of your home and struck with a bat in the face by two assailants and we had no information to go on other than a vague description and she can not ID them. I stop a guy two blocks away based on the little information I have and he no longer has the bat and denies any involvement but I feel is a strong suspect. I then tell him I have 2 witnesses that can identify whoever the assailant is and that we caught one guy who is telling us his partner did it and he only stood there and we found a bat with fingerprints. The guy then says OK I did it but my partner used the bat....and the money is hidden in my car etc.....This happens all the time and even though we dont have the bat, his partner or a witness I used this information to obtain a lawful confession. If this action was not taken your relatives assailants would get away with a violent crime. If police did not do this then a huge amount of cases may be lost.
If an officer goes undercover as a "hitman", prostitute, drug dealer, arms dealer, terrorist, he is lying and deceiving but at the same time protecting you and your family from harm. I also wanted to clarify something as far as lying to police officers goes as I see a lot of misinformation. It is unlawful to lie, give false information to any law enforcement official if it hinders in any way an investigation. You do not have to be under oath, you do not have to have been read your Miranda Rights and you can simply be engaged in a conversation with an officer regarding an investigation. If a car is stopped for running a red light and the person gives a fake name, date of birth they are clearly hindering my traffic investigation and can be arrested without any problem.
Hope this helps.

Answer 3

First, it's only a crime to lie to the FBI or when you legally swear an oath to tell the truth (like in court). Other than that you may lie all you want, but if you get caught lying it will only make you look more suspicious.

In the case of Law Enforcement, why shouldn't they be allowed to lie when not under oath? Just because they lie doesn't mean you have too. You don't even have to talk to them if you don't want. When in court they're held to the same standard as everyone else. If they lie and get caught it's perjury and is a crime.

I will admit there are times that law enforcement does violate the law in this way and it is a shame it happens, but like all crimes, it must be PROVEN that they're lying. You're best bet is to not attract police attention so you don't have to deal with them.

Answer 4

Officers cannot legally use ANY means necessary to acquire info. We do use "skillful choice of words" to gain information. Some might call that lying. The reason we do it because criminals lie. GASP!!! No, say it isn't so.

I use numerous verbal ways to "trick" criminals into telling the truth, or get them to admit to something incriminating they did. I am particularly adapt at twisting one's own words back at them and tripping them up. I wouldn't have to do any of that, if everyone told the truth at all times.

It is not legal to gain info by "any" means. Anything gained by coercion, threat, force, etc. is not admissible. Some bad cops might use these methods, but those are a small %.

Answer 5

No one is compelled to take a lie detector, they are completely voluntary. Passing a law compelling a certain group to do so would be discrimination, and completely illegal. Polygraph results are not admissible in court, so the entire process would be of little value to the investigation. The final consideration in your "petition drive" is the very few people the law would actually effect. Other than Drew Peterson, how many officers are under investigation for murder at the present time?

Answer 6

Good Question!

Most people don't know that during interrogation, the pigs have permission to lie through their teeth to get a statement from you.

So, to beat them at their game, this is what you do:

1. Sign the Miranda waiver they'll put in front of you.
2. A second later, ask to have a lawyer present. Do not make any statements, only to re-state the fact that you want a lawyer.

Immediately, *you* are in control and are free to walk away because the questioning stops. If they have proof, put up or shut up. No more lies are to be spoken to make you admit one thing or another.

And that is your legal recourse, the most important thing for citizens to learn.

Answer 7

A cop will likely defend their lying deciet by giving anyone who will listen a song and dance about how the ends justifies the means.
They believe this in their heart of hearts so it leaves the logical conclusion that they teach their children to lie.
The ends justifies the means right?
One excuse I have read is that they are tricking the criminal into a confession.
How many times have you seen a report on the news or read in the paper where the confessions or even the convictions were thrown out due to a cop's lie?
Does the ends justify the means in these situations as well?
If not then what that must mean is that it is okay to lie just so long as you sdo not get caught.
So if it okay to lie as long as you don't get caught then that must mean that you can steal, mame and murder as long as you don't get caught. Me myself, I believe that only the moraly bankrupt live by these rules, and that would be who?
The criminals and the cops.Well not ALL cops are this bankrupt and not ALL criminals are this bankrupt.
If someone robbed me and hit me with a bat and nobody had a clear description of the guys I would of course want the police to question thet fella's that they see walking down the road but thet problem here is that how do I KNOW that the cops did not 'force' a confession outta the guys?
And if they are the one's who assualted me then what if because of this cop's lazy two bit tactics the jerk off walks?
SO, I guess until we have a better system in place to assure us that the men and women we depend on to serve and protect are actually good guys we are stuck living in backwards society.

Answer 8

Because it allows them to obtain information about a crime that they would not otherwise be able to obtain.
The Supreme Court already ruled on this one.
If you aren't committing a crime, you have nothing to fear.
Also, you have your 5th amendment priviledge.
You do not have to say a word.
If you choose to speak that is up to you.
If you think the police are lying when they interrogate you, then stop talking. How hard is that?
And as the person above me said, try putting yourself in the victim's shoes on this one. That's the person we are ultimately trying to help.

Answer 9

You know you wouldn't be asking this question if you were the victim of a crime and wanted justice. Try putting the shoe on the other foot and get over your woe is me tude.

Answer 10

What police force are you talking about? Mexico?
I heard they do that, put you in a tub of water and attach wires hooked up to a car battery to your nipples to get you to talk.

Or maybe you're one of those guys just released from a Pakistani Jail and you're upset your buddies got to go to Cuba instead.