Interrogation Confession And Truth Comparative Studies In Criminal Procedure 1st Edition Lutz Eidam by Lutz Eidam, Michael Lindemann, 9783748904380, 9783848763306, 374890438X, 3848763303 instant download after payment.

However, the legal demands are ambiguous when it comes to more subtle means of obtaining a confession. Does slapping a person once or twice constitute torture? Even if the answer is affirmative, we still have to consider what Fred Inbau wrote in 1961: “I am unalterably opposed to the use of any interrogation technique that is apt to make an innocent person confess. (…) I do approve of such psychological tactics and techniques as trickery and deceit (…) to secure incriminating information from the guilty.” So maybe, as a German law professor wrote in the 1970s, the defendant’s choice to remain silent is nothing but an artful “trick” obstructing the truth finding process and the administration of justice. Thus, the question is where the line has to be drawn. Is it sufficient to

warn defendants that they have a right to remain silent and to have the assistance of a lawyer for their defense? What is the current status of the privilege against self-incrimination? Should a resulting confession be inadmissible if warnings were not given like Miranda v. Arizona stipulated in 1966 and the German Federal Criminal Court acknowledged some 25 years later as well? When has someone’s will been overborne and governing self-direction is lost, as Justice Felix Frankfurter put it in 1961? When, on the other hand, is truth discovered? More fundamentally: what is this thing called truth?

Scholars from the Unites States, the Netherlands, and Germany have

discussed these issues from their respective legal backgrounds and experiences in May 2019 at Bielefeld University and have contributed the papers you find in this volume. We were delighted to have you here for such a successful workshop!