Interrogations, Confession, and Lie Detection 2
Abstract
The primary objective of interrogation is to elicit incriminating statements, admissions, and,
potentially, full confessions to secure convictions of individuals suspected of criminal activities.
Interrogations have a historical backdrop characterized by brutal methods and physical coercion
before the 1930s. This examination delves into the intricacies of interrogation techniques, their
historical evolution, and their contemporary use in obtaining confessions. It also explores the
ethical dilemmas and consequences of coercive interrogations that lead to false confessions. In
lie detection, traditional methods based on human judgment have limitations, including
confirmation bias. The use of polygraph tests, while an advancement, is also flawed, as
professional liars can remain unaffected, and innocent suspects may exhibit stress responses.
Neuroscience offers a novel but not infallible approach to lie detection. The intricate nature of
human behavior further complicates the challenge of discerning truthfulness, emphasizing the
need for more comprehensive and reliable methods in legal contexts. The biblical worldview on
confession and honesty is presented in a unique perspective. It contrasts with modern
interrogations, as confession in the biblical context is directed towards God, emphasizing
spiritual restoration and mercy. Ethical conduct, integrity, and accountability are accentuated,
aligning with biblical teachings but sometimes diverging from the practices of law enforcement
agencies.
Keywords: interrogation, confession, false confessions, coercion, lie detection, polygraph
tests, deception, Biblical perspective, ethics, Law Enforcement
Interrogations, Confession, and Lie Detection 3
Chapter Application: Interrogations, Confession, and Lie Detection
The primary objective of interrogation is to elicit incriminating statements, admissions,
and, potentially, full confessions in order to secure convictions of individuals suspected of
criminal activities. Interrogations are typically conducted by law enforcement officers, such as
detectives and police, to investigate criminal suspects. In the era before the 1930s, these
interrogations often resorted to brutal methods and physical coercion to extract confessions, a
practice highlighted by Costanzo and Krauss in their work (2021). The confession itself is
closely intertwined with the process of interrogation, functioning as a powerful scare tactic to
compel individuals to admit their involvement in criminal acts. This process involves a spectrum
of tactics, including what is commonly portrayed as the "good cop, bad cop" approach, a familiar
practice in popular crime dramas like Law & Order, Chicago PD, or the NCIS franchise. This
evaluation of research explores interrogation techniques' historical evolution and contemporary
use in extracting confessions. Additionally, it will explore the contexts in which lie detection is
employed to uncover the truth or verify the credibility of suspects and witnesses, shedding light
on the intricacies of this crucial aspect of the criminal justice system.
Interrogation and Confession
In the context of criminal interrogations, law enforcement officers and detectives
employ a series of strategic steps to elicit confessions from suspects. These strategies are integral
to the interrogation process and are designed to create a sense of discomfort in the suspect,
ultimately leading them to admit to an alleged crime. The first of these strategies involves the
deliberate imposition of a loss of control, typically achieved by confining the suspect to a
confined space, granting the interrogator a position of authority and control. Subsequently, the
suspect may be subjected to social isolation, wherein they are interrogated in solitary
Interrogations, Confession, and Lie Detection 4
confinement and deprived of contact with the outside world, including legal counsel, friends, or
family. This isolation removes any potential sources of motivation or emotional support for the
suspect, benefiting the interrogator's objectives. The third strategy is centered on guilt, as
interrogators accuse the suspect of the crime, pressing them to confront their perceived
wrongdoing. The final step involves minimizing culpability, during which the interrogator
presents the suspect with reasons and justifications for their alleged criminal actions, hoping to
elicit a confession (Costanzo & Krauss, 2021).
Confessions obtained through such interrogation tactics are crucial evidence; however,
their accuracy can vary significantly depending on the methods employed. In some cases,
interrogations can become coercive, pushing suspects to a state of physical and mental
exhaustion, resulting in false confessions for crimes they did not commit. It is not uncommon for
individuals subjected to lengthy and harsh interrogations to ultimately admit to crimes they did
not commit. Shockingly, in 2016, 27% of known wrongful convictions were attributed to false
confessions, further emphasizing the need for scrutiny in such cases (Costanzo & Krauss, 2021).
A compelling example of a false confession can be found in the case of the West
Memphis Three. In 1993, three boys were murdered in West Memphis, Arkansas, resulting in the
conviction of Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelly Jr., and Jason Baldwin. Jessie Misskelly Jr., with
an IQ of 72, was categorized as borderline intellectual functioning. He was then questioned alone
without any legal guardian, parental figure, or legal counsel present. His confession, obtained
after hours of interrogation, was later recanted, as he claimed it was given under duress,
intimidation, fatigue, and veiled threats from the police (Selby, 2023). Misskelly, despite being
informed of his Miranda rights, maintained that he did not fully comprehend them. It is worth
noting that the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled that his confession was voluntary despite his
Interrogations, Confession, and Lie Detection 5
evident limitations, thereby illustrating a prime example of a false confession resulting from
coercive interrogation tactics. Such cases underscore the significance of safeguarding the rights
and well-being of suspects during the interrogation process (Costanzo & Krauss, 2021).
Lie Detection
Detecting deception during interrogations and court proceedings poses a formidable challenge
for detectives and legal authorities. Traditional methods of identifying deception often rely on
observing body language, demeanor, and detectives' experience. However, these approaches are
susceptible to human error and the confirmation bias inherent in psychological judgments
(Costanzo & Leo, 2009). To address these limitations, polygraph tests, often perceived as lie
detectors, have been employed to monitor physiological changes, such as blood pressure, in
suspects during questioning. However, similar to human judgment, polygraphs have their own
shortcomings. Professional liars may remain emotionally unaffected, rendering the polygraph
ineffective in detecting deception. Moreover, innocent suspects can exhibit heightened
physiological responses due to the stress of false allegations, leading to erroneous conclusions by
the polygraph machine (Littlefield, 2011). Another stimulating data point from Littlefield’s book,
The Lying Brain, is the argument that Neuroscience offers a fresh perspective or innovative
approach as applied to lie detection. However, it inadvertently perpetuates established scientific
and cultural paradigms concerning deception and its mechanical identification. This approach
presupposes that lies are quantifiable entities reflected in the physiological responses of the
autonomic and central nervous systems. It further assumes that the human body generates
objective data that can be straightforwardly and unequivocally interpreted while implying that
deception necessitates recognizing and suppressing truth. Such assumptions, deeply rooted in
Interrogations, Confession, and Lie Detection 6
scientific and cultural discourse, underscore the need for critical examination and reevaluation of
the fundamental principles underpinning the neuroscience of lie detection (Littlefield, 2011).
The intricate nature of human behavior further compounds the complexity of determining
the veracity of confessions and statements during interrogations. Detectives and interrogating
officers grapple with the challenge of accurately discerning whether a person is truthful.
Observing body language and demeanor becomes crucial, as subtle cues may betray deceit.
Some experienced officers excel in recognizing these nuanced indicators of deception, a skill
refined through extensive exposure to individuals attempting to conceal their involvement in
criminal activities (Costanzo & Krauss, 2021). However, the inherent difficulty in assessing
truthfulness underscores the potential for interrogators to err in their judgments, emphasizing the
need for a more comprehensive and reliable approach to deception detection in legal contexts.
Interrogation, Confessions, and Lying from a Biblical Worldview
As interpreted in the biblical worldview, the concept of confession diverges from the
objectives of modern interrogations and the pursuit of truth. Biblically, confession is primarily
directed towards God, acknowledging and seeking forgiveness for one's sins. This spiritual
restoration aspect contrasts sharply with the confessions elicited by interrogators and detectives,
which primarily serve punitive purposes. Christian doctrine emphasizes voluntary confessions as
a means to attain divine mercy. Proverbs 28:13 states, “Whoever conceals his transgressions will
not prosper, but he who confesses and forsakes them will obtain mercy” (ESV, 2016). Similarly,
Psalms 119:29 invokes a plea to be freed from falsehood and granted heavenly understandings
and guidance. However, the methods employed in modern interrogations often diverge from
these principles, prioritizing legal outcomes over any personal redemption.
Interrogations, Confession, and Lie Detection 7
Additionally, law enforcement officials' ethical conduct may be questioned, as the pursuit
of a confession might entail tactics that do not align with Christian teachings. A Christian
worldview hinges on the importance of honesty and integrity and believes that those who engage
in falsehood or harm the innocent will ultimately face judgment from the Lord. This biblical
perspective emphasizes that all individuals, suspects, or interrogators are equally accountable to
God for their actions. The biblical perspective on confession and honesty deviates from the
objectives and methods of modern interrogations, stressing the importance of ethical conduct,
honesty, and accountability within law enforcement in both spiritual and legal contexts.
Interrogations, Confession, and Lie Detection 8
References
Costanzo, M., & Krauss, D. (2021). Forensic and Legal Psychology (4th ed.). Worth Publishers.
Costanzo, M., & Leo, R. A. (2009). Research and Expert Testimony on Interrogations and
Confessions. Social Science Research Network. https://ssrn.com/abstract=1521647
Holy Bible: English Standard Version (2016). https://www.bible.com/ (Original Work Published
2001)
Littlefield, M. M. (2011). The Lying Brain: Lie Detection in Science and Science Fiction.
University of Michigan Press
Selby, D. (2023, June 7). West Memphis Three: What you should know about their Wrongful
Conviction. Innocence Project. https://innocenceproject.org/who-are-west-memphis-three-
damien-echols/
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
