How Strategic Use of Evidence Assists in the Detection of Deception - Essay Example

Detection of Deception Name Institution Date How Strategic Use of Evidence Assist in the Detection of Deception Introduction Suspects behave differently depending on wether they are innocent or guilty. In this case it is very crucial to differentiate between a truth and a lie. Strategic use of evidence is a technique that is adopted by most legal systems to rule out any type of deception and increase accuracy in detection process ( Navarro & Schafer, 2001). Detection of a deception varies with the type of the lie. A detective may not be able to rule out a deception even with evidence at hand. An interrogation process may involve verbal or non-verbal strategies in ruling out a deception (The British Psychology Society, 2004). A legal system can either have an innocent or guilty suspect. Detectives have to be able to read the minds of such suspects in order to detect deception and determine whether they are gulty or innocent. The power of mind detection can be applied in the interrogation techniques to assist the detectives in detecting a deception. An individual’s act or way of thinking can easily explode his intentions or state of mind. Leins et al. ( 2012) brings out a clear sense on the assumption that the techniques that the guilty and innocent people apply are likely to change depending on the issue at hand. It is therefore very crucial to establish the difference between the guilty and innocent suspect with regards to the information provided (Aldert & Anders, 2012). An innocent suspect tends to open up easily upon interrogation regardless of place and time.An innocent person can give out a detailed explanation in a manner to convince a detective and make him believe that he is telling the truth (Mitnick & Simon, 2011). He would give out the same information even if he is interrogated over and over again. Words may change a little bit but the meaning can not change at all. A detective may not be able to guess whatever is going on in the suspect’s mind ( Porter & Leanne, 2010). However an innocent person can explore events to give a detective higher chances to understand his or her heart. On the other hand, a suspect who is guilty cannot be able to answer all the questions appropriately. The suspect may tend to avoid some questions as much as possible. This is because of the feeling that a detective may get to know what is going through the suspect’s mind. At the same time the suspect may not be in a position to express himself clearly. In this case a detective is able to that the suspect at hand is guilty. The guilty ones also try as much as possible to evade the questions at hand with the aim of distorting any evidence.Strategic use of evidence can give a clear mental view of a person ( Anders et al., 2015). According to Clemens (2013) it is clear that a guilty person gives out responses in a simplified and generalized manner. This is possible because most of them tend to avoid most of the questions and respond to those that are in their favor. It becomes difficult for a detective to drill such a person due to the fact that he or she can not get the intended information. However by assessing the consistency in speech and facial expressions, one can be beeter placed in detecting a deception. On the other hand an innocent person can give out information in full without leaving any event untouched. Such people will always want to express themselves in detail so that a detective can be in a position to derive some sense from their responses. Navarro and Schaffer (2001) give out an example of a mother who killed her child but upon interrogation she tries to put away the claim. She starts responding by clearing her throat then afterwards she pauses before commencing with her talks. She makes the situation worse by crying during the interrogation process and displaying a sorrowful face. The fidgeting that comes in later on disapprove her innocense, She is even asked whether she’s telling a lie but she refutes all these claiming that sha has never told a lie before. The detectives realize some sense of guilt in both her verbal and nonverbal expressions. When taken through the second interrogation process she admits that she commited the crime and seek for forgiveness. A legal system that does not adopt the strategic use of evidence approach in its cases, can limit the level of accuracy in their investigations. It may not also be able to establish if an individual is lying or telling the truth. The system should be in a position to disrupt a weird act that is in the initial satages of planning but has not yet been commited (POST, 2011). The same procedure applies if the system wants to establish the type of lie at hand. A lie that has been interefered with will always contain a lot of exagerations. An original lie will end up having a lot of twists and turns all along a detective process. Other suspects may present themselves with a lie that has an element of confusion. Such lies are normally put in a manner to mislead a detective so that he or she may not be able to get the intended information even with evidence at hand. The last group of suspects present themselves with a lie in its natural state. Such lies are firm and straight to the point so a deetective has to be more strategic in the use of evidence. In such a situation the final judgement may be unfair. A guilty suspect can be freed while an innocent suspect may end up remaining in custody. False assumptions contribute largely to an inaccurate deception detection process. Facial expressions tecniques are also adopted by some group of liars in order to interfere with an interrogation process. During the process a suspect can easily manage his or her behavior the moment its realized that a detective has noticed something weird. One may even opt to cry so as to get some favors. Others may decide to show some signs of anger in their facial expressions. In such a state, a detective can easily get convinced if the mechanism of strategic use of evidence does not apply. Anders & Hartwigb (2008) explores on how best one can understand the mental state of another person. Conclusions can be made by just assessing a person’s character. Most people make such conclusions by assuming that they are in the real situation of the person in question. The main target here is to detect what has already taken place and in most cases to predict any forthcoming event. There are extra ordinary cases where both the innocent and guilty suspect shift depending on the interrogation process. An innocent suspect can become guilty due to a state of helplessness. On ocassions where the interrogation process is tense, the innocent can become frightened and give up on the process. This is majorly because of nervousness. The tone with which a detective uses can make a suspect lack words to express his feelings out. On the same note the guilty can also cross to the innocent side under a variety of circumstances.In a state of deceptive anger and confidence, a guilty suspect may decide to express himself clearly with some sense of consistency. In such a case the detectives can be easily convinced to assume that the suspect at hand is innocent. Telling a lie can cause a huge burden on the suspect as compared to the one telling the truth. A liar may be forced to completely alter both facial and body movements. At times he may even be forced to do away without any body movement in a move to make the lie come out. An interrogation process can be either via the phone or the suspects may need to avail themselves physically. On the phone a suspect can either be consistent or pause from time to time while being interrogated. A false statement is characterized by a lot of pauses where the suspect has to exagerate a situation. The different techniques that the innocent and guilty suspects use under various conditions can be strategically explored in an interrogation process to enhance deception detection.The strategic use of evidence mechanism applies mostly when the two types of suspects do not have an idea of what the detective knows. In most cases the guilty suspect fabricate statements to cover up for everything. The innocent suspects on the other hand tend to narrate everything that they memorized. There is a lot of relationship between vocal characters such as rise and fall in tonation and detective deception. Therefore a powerful interrogation process requires a good listener. Both verbal and non-verbal expressions facilitates chances for deception. References Anders , G. P., Aldert, V., & Bruno , V. (2015). Detecting Deception: Current Challenges and Cognitive Approaches. New York: John Wiley& Sons. Leins, A. D., Fisher, P. R., & Ross, J. S. (2012). Exploring liars’ strategies for creating deceptive reports. Tacoma: The British Psychological Society. Navarro, J., & Schafer, R. J. (2001, July 9). Detection Deception. Retrieved April 16, 2016, from http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/fbi/decep_detect_01.pdf Porter, S., & Leanne, B. t. (2010). The truth about lies: What works in detecting high-stakes deception? Retrieved April 16, 2016, from The British Psychological Society: https://people.ok.ubc.ca/stporter/Publications_files/What%20Works%20Invited%20LCP%20FINAL.pdf Aldert, V., & Anders, G. P. (2012). Eliciting cues to deception and truth: What matters are the questions asked. Retrieved April 16, 2016, from Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition: http://londonmemoryclinic.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Deception-cues-Vrij-2012.pdf Anders , P. G., & Hartwigb, M. (2008). A new theoretical perspective on deception detection: On the psychology of instrumental mind-reading. New York: Taylor & Francis. Clemens, F. (2013). The Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) Technique and Suspects’ Strategies. Retrieved April 16, 2016, from Detecting Lies About Past and Future Actions: https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/2077/32705/1/gupea_2077_32705_1.pdf Mitnick, K. D., & Simon, W. L. (2011). The Art of Deception. New York: John Wiley & Sons. POST. (2011, May). Detecting Deception. Retrieved April 16, 2016, from The Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology: http://www.parliament.uk/documents/post/postpn375Detecting_deception.pdf The British Psychology Society. (2004, October 6). A review of the current scientific status and fields of application of Polygraphic Deception Detection. Retrieved April 16, 2016, from The British Psychology Society: http://www.bps.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/polygraphic_deception_detection_-_a_review_of_the_current_scientific_status_and_fields_of_application.pdf Read More