Homework Question on Use of Violence in Interrogating a Terrorist
A suspected terrorist is arrested in connection with an imminent terror threat. A bomb has been discovered at a local shopping center. The timer shows that the bomb will detonate in 2 hours. The man in custody is believed to be the bomb maker and the only person who knows how to disable the bomb. You and your partner are brought in to interrogate the suspect. An hour passes, and you haven’t made any progress. Your partner unplugs all of the recording equipment and asks you to leave the room. Twenty minutes later the officer exits the room with the code to deactivate the bomb. You look inside the room to find the suspect unconscious and his face covered in blood. Your partner asks you to back up his story that the suspect became aggressive during the interrogation and that he was simply defending himself. There is no tape to challenge your version of the events. It would be the terrorist’s word against yours.
Would you follow your partner’s instructions? Why or why not? Be sure to include in your answer the ethical and legal consequences of your decision.
- Your paper must be at least 1000_________ words.
- Please double space your paper and use standard 12 point font.
- Make sure to proofread your paper before submitting.
- Please follow APA format when referencing information from outside sources.
- Please include your word count at the end of your assignment.
Homework Answer on Use of Violence in Interrogating a Terrorist
In the process of investigating an alleged suspect for any purported offences, it is considered a criminal offence for an officer to use force or physical violence in coercing information from the alleged suspect. The government is quite explicit in its disapproval of the use of force on a suspect in an on-going investigation process. According to the Detainee Treatment Act, no person regardless of his or her nationality or physical location shall be subjected to cruel or inhuman treatment while in custody (Manfred, 2006).
However, the Detainee Treatment Act sites several situations where the use of force is justifiable. For instance, an officer is well within his/her rights in deploying force in an attempt to defend people from unlawful violence. Bearing this in mind, I would therefore wholly back up my partner’s story regardless of the ethical and legal ramifications that wouldmost likely come from it.
My decision to back my partner’s actions though unlawful would be based on the fact that, given the severity of the issue and the time limit in addition to the fact that the suspect was not forthcoming with information regarding the bomb, more so considering the fact that lives of innocent people were at stake, use of forceful coercion was inevitable at that point. The fact that the suspect has no regard for the lives of innocent people that would be at risk in the event of the bomb detonating would be among my reasons for backing up my partner’s side of the story.