Quote:
|
For example, how would the police get a confession from someone who is innocent? It's hard to imagine any circumstance in which they could do so without violating the confessions rule, i.e., coercion, inducement, or a witness operating under some mental impairment.
|
Absolutely....but here is the rub. Law enforcement does do that. They do break the rules in pursuit of who they think is guilty (not always but numerous examples). And who is it that investigates them if the accusation is brought up? Other law enforcement, and that is a really hard pill to swallow and believe they will be neutral when it comes to deciding.
Then the judge gets to decide based on evidence presented to him from both those parties and a single person accused that had no representation when it was supposed to have occurred. That is a massive problem in my mind. Where is the equality in that?
Quote:
|
By contrast, how would the police get a confession from someone who is guilty? That can be done without coercion, inducement, or an impaired mental state. It could simply emerge from the types of investigative questioning techniques that were used in these companion cases. In short, good strategies for probing witnesses and obtaining information from them without violating the confessions rule.
|
One question...how does any of that change if a lawyer is present?