1
Article critique
Name
Institution affiliation
Course
Instructor
Date
ARTICLE CRITIQUE 2
The first article for this critique will focus on the topic of police interrogation and
confessions. The historical case being looked at in this situation is that of Frazier v. Cupp from
1969. The article chosen for this critique is “Deception in the Interrogation Room.” The piece
looks to address the issue revolving surrounding the attainment of confessions from arrested
persons. The constitution of the United States generally does not allow the coercion of suspects
into revealing information. Instead, it is highly encouraged that interrogators let the suspect give
the data voluntarily. There are three ways through which the government uses to determine how
voluntary information was provided. These start with the mental state of the suspect, followed by
the methods used to obtain the confession and, finally, the behavioral conduct adopted by the
police. With the given information, the thought that revelations should voluntarily seem
straightforward until complications are introduced into the mix and especially with the
consideration of police behavior. One of the actions largely prohibited is the use of physical
force. However, the government and court have allowed the use of deception as a psychological
tactic to encourage suspects to confess. The given point thus introduces the historical case,
Frazier v. Cupp, from 1969, where the suspect was told that their confederate had admitted when
had not done so. The Supreme Court ruled that it was not wrong for officers to use deception
during interrogation. However, certain cases are not allowed during deception, for instance,
telling the suspect that the incriminating information they give will not be used in the court of
law. These ideas can be confusing, so there is a need for more research to be done revolving
around deception in interrogation and confessions.
One of the factors that made this article a good read was the presentation of ideas is
simple and precise sentences that were easy to understand. Using complex ideas in a piece can
ARTICLE CRITIQUE 3
often hinder the audience from going through it or even losing the intended message in between.
However, the article failed as it did not provide a lot of background information and especially
on the case chosen for this piece. Providing a bit more details surrounding the case would have
given the audience a good background on what deception during interrogation looks like. Also,
the article fails to provide a definite solution and conclusion regarding the complexity of
deception in interrogation the authors finish by noting that psychologists will need to dive deeper
into understanding the issue surrounding the use of deceit and the voluntary confessions
(Najdowski et al., 2014). As consequentialism, the question of deception during interrogation
should be used depending on the case at hand. The end justifies the means as followers of this
philosophy believe. Therefore, the author makes a sensible argument in detailing the reasonable
conclusion of using dishonesty to get a confession out of a suspect.
While the philosophy of consequentialism does not see anything wrong with a little lie to
coerce a suspect into giving valuable information, the Christian point of view is against tis act.
The bible teaches against deceiving and lying as God hates this act. In proverbs 12:22, the
reading details that God despises lying lips and rejoices when people are truthful (Doug Britton
Books, 2020). Therefore, christens are taught to stray from dishonesty regardless of the reason
being used. Instead of using deceptive interrogation tactics, Christians are taught to use other
ways to get the information as long as they are ethical. Exaggerating a story or telling what the
current generation calls a white lie is not enough to convince christens that lying is the correct
action a person should take.
ARTICLE CRITIQUE 4
In this section of the critique, the main topic being addressed falls under the stop and
frisk rule. The case to be used to complete it that between Terry v. Ohio from 1968. The reading
piece is “Symposium Introduction: Terry v. Ohio at 50: The Past, Present, & Future of Stop and
Frisk” by Catherine McFarlane. The piece starts with detailing information regarding this case.
The terry v. Ohio saw the Supreme Court hold that police officers were allowed to stop a person
for a brief investigation if they had a reasonable cause to suspect them of criminal behavior.
Also, the court held that the same officer had the right to frisk the suspected persons for weapons
if they had reasonable suspicion that the suspect is a danger to them or the public. The rule that
the court gave, however, does not seem to apply to the current generation. For one, this rile
increased the rate of racial profiling. Stereotypes that black people are likely to be criminals have
resulted in police officers stopping and frisking them without reasonable suspicion, just based on
color. In addition to that, this rule does not seem to fit the current laws and legislation
implemented on guns. People can now own and openly carry firearms, revealed or not,
depending on the state. With that in mind, officers no longer can tell who has criminal intent and
who does not. The #MeToo campaign joins this bandwagon by adding that frisking may feel like
sexual violation from the police. People have been dying in the hands of the police for refusing
to cooperate with the frisking and not because they have committed a crime. Therefore, the piece
ends by concluding the need to revisit the rule upheld by the Supreme Court with regards to the
Terry v. Ohio case.
The given reading piece demonstrated an argument that many people have not
considered. Often people assume that the decisions of the Supreme Court are sound. However,
looking at things at this time, one cannot help but agree with the points the author gave on how
ARTICLE CRITIQUE 5
unreasonable the Terry v. Ohio ruling is. It may have been reasonable in 1968, but currently,
there may be a need to revise it. The article detailed that the stop and frisk rule has increased the
issue of racial profiling (MacFarlane, 2018). The given fact can be proven by looking at the
situation in the United States. Black people and Latinos are more likely to be stopped based on
their race compared to white people. The piece was sure to mention Eric Garner, who died in the
hands of police officers in cuu2014, not for being a criminal but for refusing to cooperate with
the officers (MacFarlane, 2018). The trend did not stop with Garner as more cases have sprung
over the last six years, with the latest ones being the Breonna Taylor and George Floyd cases. An
interesting fact, both of these cases were of black people. Thus, the given occurrences show that
the reading piece makes sound arguments on the ruling made from the terry v. Ohio case. The
author also makes sure to detail the piece systematically with simple terms and sentences, all
strengths as the audience is not lost of the essential points.
Christianity can be used as a point of view also to reinforce the unreasonable facts that
are brought out by the court’s ruling on the Terry v. Ohio case. Some of the things bound to
catch a person’s attention from the reading were those of racial profiling and Garner’s death on
the police chokehold (MacFarlane, 2018). Christianity, in no way, accepts such acts, and the
bible reinforces this belief. From john 7:24, Christians are told not to judge a person by their
appearance but instead judge them righteously. Any time a police officer suspects another human
being without proof is already profiling them. Doing so because of their race makes the situation
worse, considering Christians are taught that everyone was created in God’s image.
ARTICLE CRITIQUE 6
References
Doug Britton Books. (2020). Tell the Truth.
https://www.dougbrittonbooks.com/onlinebiblestudies-
personalgrowthanddevelopment/donotlie-tellthetruth-t19-1/
MacFarlane, C. (2018). Symposium Introduction: Terry v. Ohio at 50: The Past, Present, &
Future of Stop and Frisk. Idaho Law Review, 54(2), pp. 279-285.
Najdowski, C., & Bonventre, C. (2014). Deception in the Interrogation Room. American
Psychological Association, 45(5), pp. 26. https://www.apa.org/monitor/2014/05/jn
