"Inducing confessions, deceiving confessions, and accusing confessions."
The devil's interrogation methods commonly used by detectives (inducing confessions, deceiving confessions, and accusing confessions):
Detective: "If you do it honestly, you can go home right away. If you don't tell , you can’t go home, and we can’t help you! Because we all can’t eat, we can’t go home, we are also working hard, you understand us, it is convenient for us, and we will provide convenience for you in the future.”
Detective: "Tell me! Why did you send XX million yuan to XXX people?"
Investigator: "Come on, didn't you just send XX million yuan? It's nothing. It's normal. You can send hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars. We are not targeting you. There is nothing to be afraid of."
Investigator: "XXX people admitted that you sent XX million to his house. Yuan, you haven't said anything yet."
Investigator: "We know all the process of sending money (there is a video, but there is no video), it just depends on your attitude."
Investigator: "You haven't told me yet? If you don't tell the truth, you will be guilty of covering up again. The two crimes will be punished together, that is, several crimes will be punished at the same time. The minimum sentence will be more than 10 years. Who will take care of your wife and children then?" "
Investigator: "Don't ask the court to sentence you for a few more years."
Investigator: "The matter has been clearly explained. I'll give you a bail if you surrender." Waiting for trial, let the court give you a suspended sentence, so you don’t have to go in. "
Investigator: "Here is XXX’s confession, you see he has admitted it."< /p>
Investigator: "Just now your friend called our leader and wanted to bail you out pending trial, but you have to cooperate, otherwise your friend can't help you."
Investigator: "Tell me, I'll get you released on bail pending trial right away." Hold the bail pending trial decision letter in hand and show it to the person being interrogated in person.
Investigator: "On the day of the crime, the victim was wearing (or not wearing) pink clothes, right?"
Investigator: "On the day of the crime, how many people saw you with their own eyes? , you still won't tell the truth? "
Investigator: "If you don't tell the truth, we will report the situation to your unit and see how you behave in the future. "
We can watch. It is obvious that in the face of strong psychological pressure and the psychological offensive of investigators, and because most criminal suspects do not have basic legal knowledge, it is easy to believe the "teachings" of investigators. These "teachings" are like cardinals standing majestically in front of the penitent. They lack offensive and defensive capabilities.
The first big plan: induce a confession!
It refers to the act of inducing criminal suspects or criminal defendants to make confessions in improper ways based on the subjective intentions or inferences of investigators. Inducing confessions is good at concealing the intention and purpose of the interrogation. It abandons the weakness of torture to directly state the purpose of the interrogation. It adopts a step-by-step strategy from shallow to deep, from the outside to the inside, so that the person being interrogated gives up his vigilance and feels that everything is insignificant. The interrogation caused him to unknowingly fall into a trap according to the interrogator's design and he was unable to extricate himself.
Second plan: false confession!
Refers to investigators inducing criminal suspects to confess. For example, the investigator says, "So-and-so has confessed. If you don't admit it, the law can still convict you. If you have a bad attitude, it may be a little more serious." This is a common technique used by some investigators in interrogations. Maybe some cases are indeed solved through this method, but we must realize that this method of fraudulent confession can easily lead to false confessions. Because the person being interrogated will think that the co-defendant has confessed under the wrong prompt, that is to say, even if he does not admit it, he may be convicted, and if he does not "truthfully confess", he may be severely punished. Especially when the parties involved do not have legal knowledge and law enforcement officials use coercion and inducement, false confessions can easily lead to wrongful convictions.
Three major strategies: oral confession!
Indicated confession means that investigators specify the confession of a criminal suspect based on his or her subjective intention. It often becomes an inevitable means for investigators to induce confessions.
There is still the possibility of inducing the criminal suspect to tell the truth by inducing a confession, but the accusation is even more harmful! Everyone has the mentality of avoiding the important and taking the easy, seeking advantages and avoiding disadvantages. If investigators mislead criminal suspects, some people who do not know the stakes will inevitably tell lies against their will. Once a criminal suspect closely matches the "criminal facts" with evidence such as the time and place of the crime, the victim's statement, and the witness testimony, investigators will insist that this is a voluntary and true confession by the criminal suspect, and there is no inducement or deception in the confession. At this time, it is difficult for the judge to believe the defendant's excuse. At the same time, the defendant cannot prove the illegal behavior of the investigators, so an unjust, false, and wrongful conviction occurs.
Twin brothers
Inducing confessions, defrauding confessions, accusing confessions, and extorting confessions through torture are twin brothers with many similarities:
First, investigators are all Want to get the transcript (answer) you want;
The second is that they are all illegal means;
The third is that they are prone to the same consequences (unjust, false and wrongful convictions);
Fourth, investigators are afraid of taking responsibility. All investigators are afraid of taking responsibility and are unwilling to admit that they have committed the above-mentioned behavior;
Fifth, all investigators understand that the verbal evidence they have obtained may be false.
Why is "inducing a confession, deceiving a confession, or accusing a confession" so scary?
1. The investigative agencies do not pay attention to it. The investigative agencies believe that eliciting confessions, defrauding confessions, and accusing confessions have existed since ancient times. They are only means and methods of investigation and evidence collection, and do not constitute illegal evidence collection. One investigator said: "Within 24 hours, either he collapsed or I collapsed."
Secondly, the parties and lawyers do not pay attention to it. During the author’s career as a lawyer, there was an incredible phenomenon. Many defendants retracted their confessions in court. The reason was that all investigators said that they had used torture to extract confessions, but they never did. No defendant said that investigators induced confessions, made false confessions, or made accusations.
Third, it is highly concealable. Words about inducement, deception, and accusations will not appear in the transcript. When recording, investigators will process their own words and those of the criminal suspect. It is formed according to the inherent template without leaving any flaws. Some investigators induce or deceive confessions into making confessions before they are officially recorded. They say they talk about laws and policies (lenity for confessions, severity for resistance), etc., and they start writing records only after they have completely "conquered" the criminal suspect.
Fourth, it is very deceptive. Many criminal suspects do not know in the end that they were tricked, deceived, or colluded into confessing. They think that the investigators have treated them well, such as the sketch of Uncle Benshan. There is only one explanation for this phenomenon, and that is that eliciting, deceiving, and accusing confessions are very deceptive, and their harmful consequences far exceed the directness and violence of torture to extract confessions.
Fifth, there are no traces. After torture is used to extract confessions, scars will be left more or less on the criminal suspects. Physical examinations will also be conducted when detainees are admitted to the detention center. However, after the induced confession, fraudulent confession, or accusation occurs, there is no trace at all, and it is impossible for investigators to leave evidence for their own records.
Sixth, no one intervenes. When the defendant submits an inquiry to the supervisory authority and the judicial authority about the possibility of induced confessions, fraudulent confessions, or accusations of confessions, the judicial authorities avoid investigating the induced confessions, fraudulent confessions, or accusations of confessions, and even A considerable number of judicial organs have been reduced to a place where confessions are induced, deceived, and accused. They are especially afraid that the defendant will retract his confession, which will prevent the trial from proceeding smoothly. In the court's judgment documents, there is almost no statement that "there is the existence of induced confessions, deceived confessions, or accusations". "Confessions will not be accepted", and in the cases that were remanded for retrial and revised sentencing, there was almost no mention of the illegality of eliciting, defrauding, or accusing confessions.
Seventh, there is no remedy. Illegal evidence is excluded. Do not induce confessions, deceive confessions, or accuse confessions. Article 54 of the Criminal Procedure Law: Using torture to extract confessions and other illegal methods to collect confessions from criminal suspects and using violence Any verbal evidence collected through illegal methods such as threats and threats shall be excluded. Article 95 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law explains "illegal methods such as torture to extract confessions" as follows: the use of corporal punishment or disguised corporal punishment, or the use of other methods to cause the defendant to suffer severe physical or mental pain or Painful methods are used to force the defendant to make confessions against his will. It can be seen that the parties involved are helpless against the investigators' behavior of inducing confessions, defrauding confessions, and making false accusations and frame-ups.
Eighth, it is difficult to reverse the case, especially in cases where convictions are based on oral confessions, such as drug trafficking cases, bribery cases, organizing and leading underworld organizations, etc.
What to do?
Inducing confessions, defrauding confessions, and accusing confessions are so harmful, how to solve them? The author believes that: it should be included in the scope of exclusion of illegal evidence, firstly; secondly, all interrogations must have simultaneous audio and video recordings, if not, they will be invalid; thirdly, all interrogations can only be conducted in the case handling place or detention center; fourthly, Completely reject this "fruit of the poisonous tree" approach and implement "zero tolerance". "Zero tolerance" requires the establishment of a sound accountability system.
The law is still unsatisfactory, but this should not be a reason not to pay attention to the law! Speak up when it's time to speak up, instead of being timid and trembling!