United States has much higher crime rate than Japan, Saudi Arabia and China. There are two reasons for that. First United States lacks the shared traditions of those societies that encourage citizens to continuously scrutinize and informally impose sanctions on one another. Second, because of United States tremendous cultural diversity, its socialization process cannot impose the same value system on everyone. So short of trying to entirely reshape American culture, one can only hope to discover formal, external controls that might help to deal more effectively with crime.
Early researchers found that certainty, not severity, of threatened punishment serves to deter. Later researcher described that interaction of formal and informal sanctions are the key to the puzzle. In other words, legal punishment like arrest and jail are most effective when they set off more intimidating informal costs: stigma (embarrassment); attachment costs (loss of relationship); and commitment costs like loss of educational, occupational, and marital opportunities (William and Hawkins, 1986). Thus such factors as employment and marital status can help determine whether formal sanction will deter crime (Berk et al., 1992). Deterrence, only works with people who have something to lose in the reverberation of informal sanctions (Toby, 1957).
Techniques of interviewing a suspect:
Years ago, police detectives used brute force and intimidation to get confessions. Today, “third degree” tactics are more psychological in nature. In Criminal Interrogation and Confessions, a popular how-to manual written for the police, Fred Inbau and his colleagues present sixteen elaborate ploys that can be used to extract confessions. One approach is to minimize the offence by making excuses on behalf of the suspect. Lulled into a false sense of security and led to expect leniency, the suspects caves in. a second approach is to frighten the suspect into submission by exaggerating the charges or pretending to have damaging evidence. In this scenario, the suspect is led to think that it is futile to mount a defense. A third approach is to befriend the suspect and use the relationship to offer sympathy and friendly advice. These ploys may sound as though they come from a television script, but they are frequently used in real life (Gudjonsson, 1992).
Do people ever confess to crimes they did not commit? Occasionally, yes. As hard as it to believe, there are some chilling cases on record. Sometimes innocent suspect confess under pressure as an act of compliance, merely to escape an aversive interrogation; in other instances, suspects actually come to believe that they are guilty of the crime, illustrating the process of internalization.
Is it really possible to convince people that they are guilty of an act they did not commit? In a study analyzing an interrogation ploy frequently used by the police, Kassin and Kiechel recruited pairs of college students to work on a fast- or slow-paced reaction time computer task. At one point, the computer crashed and subjects were accused of having caused the damage by pressing a key they were specifically instructed to avoid. All subjects were truly innocent and denied the charge. In half the session, however, the second student (who was really a confederate) said that she saw the subject hit the forbidden key. Demonstrating the process of compliance, many subjects confronted by this false witness signed a confession handwritten by the experimenter. And demonstrating the process of internalization, some of those subjects later admitted their guilt to a stranger (also a confederate) who had overheard the commotion and, when the two were alone, asked what happened. On both measures, confessions were most likely to be drawn from subjects who had worked on a fast-paced task, a situation that heightened uncertainty concerning their own actions. It seems that despite innocence, people who are vulnerable to suggestion can be induced to confess and internalize guilt by the presentation of false evidence- an interrogation tactic commonly used by the police (Kassin and Kiechel).
Whenever a suspect confesses but then retracts the statement and goes to trial, the judge must determine whether the statement was voluntary or coerced. If it was clearly coerced- as when a suspect is isolated for a long period of time, deprived of food or sleep, threatened, or abused- the confession is excluded. If not, it is admitted into evidence for the jury to evaluate.
Sometimes people confess after being told that they have failed the polygraph, or lie detector test. A polygraph is an instrument that records multiple channels of physiological arousal. Rubber tubes are strapped around the suspect’s torso to measure breathing; blood pressure cuffs are wrapped around the upper arm to measure pulse rate; and electrodes are placed on the fingertips to record perspiration. The instrument is used to detect deception on the assumption that when people lie, they become anxious in ways that can be measured. After convincing a suspect that the polygraph is effective and established his or her baseline level of arousal, the examiner asks a series of yes-no questions and compares how the suspect reacts to emotionally arousing crime-relevant questions and control questions that are arousing but not relevant to the crime. In theory, innocent suspects- whose denials are truthful- should be more aroused by the control questions, and guilty suspects- whose denials are false- should be more aroused by the crime-relevant questions.
Pursuit and Emergency Vehicle Operation:
In any society, police have to pursuit vehicles in order to capture the criminals or avoid any traffic disorder. Once a criminal is detected or traffic disorder takes place, police have to pursuit the alleged vehicle.
Motor vehicle pursuit is an attempt, which is done to apprehend the occupants of the vehicle, which is disobeying traffic laws. The main purpose of the pursuit is to ensure the safety of the citizens and police officers that are pursuing the vehicle. Vehicle pursuit is done with all emergency equipments like sirens, lights etc.
Police officers are ordered to terminate the pursuit if there is a risk for their own or citizen’s safety. During the pursuit, police officers are responsible for the safety of the citizens and so they are not allowed to do anything, which are injurious for their own, or citizen’s safety.
Field Interview Process:
Once a crime takes place, it must be detected and reported in order to draw attention. It is the duty of police to find the suspect and decide whether to make an arrest. The investigation module is to find and capture the suspect and gather various information about the suspect.
A field interview is completed by questioning the eyewitnesses about a criminal activity, or an activity, which is not criminal in nature but suspicious enough that it could be related to a criminal activity.
It has been estimated that almost 77,000 people in a year, are charged with crimes solely on the basis of eyewitness evidence. In a field interview, police also record the names, addresses, license or other information of eyewitnesses. Field Interview is always not proved accurate as people are not under arrest and they may forget something.