In a criminal interrogation, the end justifies the means?

Question

I need help defining ends vs. means and since
this is for debate i need good help on values, criterias and contentions and evidence.

Answer 1

Do not use illegal means in a criminal interrogation because illegal evidence extracted are not admissible in court under the law.

Answer 2

An innocent mans confession and imprisonment is no desirable end. Torture is not justifiable means to such an end. The Constitution is written as a paper for a revolution. People SHOULD own tanks, bazookas, black hawk helicopters. Because the whole purpose of the 2nd amendment is to allow the people to overthrow the government! The Miranda rights are derived with the purpose of arresting, and speedily prosecuting those suspected of crimes. If you can ask a man if he stole a car, but he has an allaby, he was at a casino, you have no case, the man is innocent. Now, take the same man, torture him for days, and ask him, he'll confess, just to end it. He'll take the death penalty for a crime he didn't admit. "Enhanced interrogation" is a tool of the KGB, not of the American government. Even if the means are sole psychological, the level of stress on the person can drive them to self harm, aggression, or suicide. That's not what you want either.

Answer 3

Police detectives sometimes have to lie to suspects and pull tricks to get the information they need like a confession. I think that's what you are asking. The "means" is not virtuous when people have to lie but getting a criminal investigation solved, i.e. the "ends" are justified when it's for the good of society. An example would be when a cop says "we got your buddy in the other room who just ratted you out and he's saying you did it all." They do that all the time to get the info they need.

Answer 4

The end doesn't necessarily justify the means in normal circumstances -- but, the purpose of the police, in general, is to protect society and the people -- they're allowed to lie.

End is the result (a confession . . .)

Means is the method of getting that (lying, coercion, beatings).

Legally, police can lie -- people are often misguided in their belief that the police have to tell us the truth -- they don't. It's sort of the greater good or public interest rule.

Answer 5

This is a topic on which many disagree.

In America before Miranda v. Arizona in 1966 and in many parts of the world today, the use of trickery and even torture to elicit confessions was common.

Of course duress often develops false information, and many have been convicted falsely. It is also rather unpleasant for the accused, who is often injured whether innocent or guilty.