In the past, as a police investigator, I have lied to the subject of my interrogation/investigation to elicit a confession. The United States Supreme Court has ruled that the Police can lie to you in order to extract a confession, Frazier v. Cupp, 394 U.S. 731, 739 (1969). Just becuase the government says its okay under certain circumstances doesn't mean it is.

Here's an example of what an officer lying during in interview would look like:

There are other circumstances where a police officer can be placed in a situation where he has to lie. For instance, an undercover officer is asked by the suspect during an investigation, "Are you a cop?" If he wants to live or avoid serious injury, he will lie.

Opinions?

__________________
Dan
Member, Soaring Oaks Presbyterian (PCA)
www.soaringoaks.org
Northern California
The duty of a theologian is, not to please the ear with empty sounds, but to confirm the conscience by teaching things which are true, certain and profitable.
John Calvin, 1559

If these folks being interrogated had an ounce of sense, the lie told to them wouldn't matter. Any question before a trial would be met only with silence.

But the point remains that to lie in this situation, as an officer of the law, is simply not permissible.

Tactics like this result in innocent people going to prison and that is no small thing. Using intimidation and deceit works equally well on the innocent and the guilty. We almost do not have a court system; we have a plea-bargaining system. And this is partially why.

If the State cannot prove its case honestly, then it does not have Biblical warrant to prosecute at all. I hope not to be too blunt, but God is not glorified when a group of liars prosecute a group of thieves.

"The law itself is guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish" - Frederick Bastiat

__________________
Jeremy Gage
First Baptist Church
Durham, NC

"No heart can conceive that treasury of mercies which lies in this one privilege, in having liberty and ability to approach unto God at all times, according to his mind and will." - John Owen

Thanks for your comments Jeremy. No, I definately don't think you are being too blunt. I tend to agree with you, but know from experience that there are times when it (lying) is unavoidable.

For instance, undercover work, by its very nature, is a big lie. Crime rings of all types are broken up by undercover officers that have to lie at many various stages to get the job done.

If you have seen the Dateline NBC Specials that net child molesters ... That is one big lie to lure those predators out of the woodwork into police custody.

__________________
Dan
Member, Soaring Oaks Presbyterian (PCA)
www.soaringoaks.org
Northern California
The duty of a theologian is, not to please the ear with empty sounds, but to confirm the conscience by teaching things which are true, certain and profitable.
John Calvin, 1559

Didn't almost everyone in other threads we've had about deceit and lying for a "good cause" that could "save lives" or "make us safer" say it would be okay?

__________________
Davidius
Husband of Emilia
Member: First Reformed Presbyterian Church of Durham (RPCNA) - Durham, NC
Currently in the process of transferring membership to an as-yet-undecided church in Chapel Hill
Student: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, German Literature and Classics

Hey, what about the prostitute?

__________________
Andrew DeShazo, Deacon, Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, Memphis, TN
"All of us stumble in many ways, but if anyone is never at fault in what he says, then he is mature, able to control his whole body."(James 3:2)

All of those revolved around the one being lied to "not being entitled to the truth." That is, when you know the person would use the information for evil means (i.e. Nazi at your door looking for Jews) - then it is acceptable. And, in my view, a moral duty to lie as Rahab did.

But, this is not that kind of case, so far as the interrogation goes. There is no good knowledge that the individual is guilty - in fact the whole purpose of the lie is to manipulate a confession (real or false).

Even if there was a 'knowledge' or strong suspicion that the suspect is guilty - we cannot say that he would use the non-lie for the purpose of evil, and so the previous justification is not applicable.

We cannot loosen the standard for when lying is justified merely to this: whenever we think it's for a good cause. The situation must be on the order of a Rahab situation, not a 'we don't have enough evidence yet and want to make our jobs easier' situation. Besides, confessions brought about by false and intimidating interrogations are simply not reliable, and result in many innocents incarcerated.

__________________
Jeremy Gage
First Baptist Church
Durham, NC

"No heart can conceive that treasury of mercies which lies in this one privilege, in having liberty and ability to approach unto God at all times, according to his mind and will." - John Owen

What an interesting thread. I think I'm going to enjoy watching this one unfold.



My personal opinion is of little use to the discussion(because opinion by itself doesn't make a logical argument for or against) but I will ask if a cop will lie to gain a confession (real or false), how can the public be assured that the police will uprightly perform their duty to protect and serve?

I think that society as a whole has become calloused to lies. We almost expect to be lied to and accept it as normality. Particullarly in the area of politics.

__________________
Donald Jacobs
Marysville. WA
Cascade Church (CRCNA)

Cum vero infirmor tunc potens sum.

Perhaps this will deviate the thread, but the premise is not true. The police have no legal duty to protect and serve - their duty is to enforce the law.

__________________
Jeremy Gage
First Baptist Church
Durham, NC

"No heart can conceive that treasury of mercies which lies in this one privilege, in having liberty and ability to approach unto God at all times, according to his mind and will." - John Owen

Thank you,

I agree, but feel that their duty to enforce the law is a given. At the same time the reason they enforce the law is so that we may all be protected under the law. (Not to mention I've never seen a patrol car that didn't have "to serve and protect" inscribed somewhere on it, at least in the area of the US that I come from. )

__________________
Donald Jacobs
Marysville. WA
Cascade Church (CRCNA)

Cum vero infirmor tunc potens sum.

This is incorrect too. They have no legal duty to enforce the law. They have the legal right to enforce the law, they have the discretion to enforce or not to enforce. If they had to duty to enforce the law, then they would be civily liable for every crime that took place, ergo they are not for that very reason.

Now, when they undertake to help a citizen, they create a duty to render help consistent with the hypothetical reasonable person standard because of the "undertaking" exception to the no duty to render aid doctrine.

__________________
Andrew DeShazo, Deacon, Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, Memphis, TN
"All of us stumble in many ways, but if anyone is never at fault in what he says, then he is mature, able to control his whole body."(James 3:2)

Because lies told to suspects in the interview room are after Miranda rights have been waived and are documented in audio, video and police reports and subject to the scrutiny of lawyers, judges and jurys. There is never a warrant for a police officer to lie about telling a lie to a suspect when testifying.

__________________
Dan
Member, Soaring Oaks Presbyterian (PCA)
www.soaringoaks.org
Northern California
The duty of a theologian is, not to please the ear with empty sounds, but to confirm the conscience by teaching things which are true, certain and profitable.
John Calvin, 1559

Yeah, I have a book a thick as my head sitting on the bed that ennumerates rules of Evidence. On cross-examination, a Defense attorney can do a good bit to impeach the testimony of an officer.

__________________
Andrew DeShazo, Deacon, Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, Memphis, TN
"All of us stumble in many ways, but if anyone is never at fault in what he says, then he is mature, able to control his whole body."(James 3:2)

Samuel Ward's sermon "Jethro's Justice of the Peace" (based on Exodus 18.21-23, which refers to the kind of magistrates Moses should choose, ie., "able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness," et al.) has a section on that phrase "men of truth" that is worth reading. Magistrates ought to be men of truth indeed, setting an example to others in how the truth is handled, not corrupting the truth. Scripture teaches that "all prejudicing the truth...especially in public judicature" (WLC 145, italics mine) is a violation of the ninth commandment.

__________________
Andrew Myers
Husband of Jessica, Father of Jackson, Katie and Samuel
Member, Presbyterian Reformed Church of Northern Virginia
Warrenton, VA USA
Editor, The Matthew Poole Project

"Let your Morning Thoughts, and your last Evening Thoughts, be what shall become of you to all Eternity." -- Matthew Poole

I was too quick and imprecise. This is much more accurate.

__________________
Jeremy Gage
First Baptist Church
Durham, NC

"No heart can conceive that treasury of mercies which lies in this one privilege, in having liberty and ability to approach unto God at all times, according to his mind and will." - John Owen

In the worldly kingdom, the ends justify the means so anything goes, here, lying to promoting a greater good (as it seems). But it doesn't promote a greater good. It promotes lying in the guise of being good.

If lying promoted good, God would say, "Lie." Jesus would have lied. He would have told his children and citizens to lie.

But, in the heavenly kingdom, it's citizens do not lie. They speak the truth in love.

You cannot ever do evil so that a good results. You become an instrument of Satan to build his kingdom.

Now, do I do it? Yep. So does everyone. We believers, when we are actually believing God at His word, advance His kingdom and its other-worldly ethic system otherwise, we help Satan with his.

__________________
Bryan Wiley
Southern Baptist Theological Seminary
Reformed Baptist Church
Louisville, Kentucky

Yes, I've gotten headaches reading such books.

__________________
Dan
Member, Soaring Oaks Presbyterian (PCA)
www.soaringoaks.org
Northern California
The duty of a theologian is, not to please the ear with empty sounds, but to confirm the conscience by teaching things which are true, certain and profitable.
John Calvin, 1559

I do too.

__________________
Andrew DeShazo, Deacon, Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, Memphis, TN
"All of us stumble in many ways, but if anyone is never at fault in what he says, then he is mature, able to control his whole body."(James 3:2)

Actually, there were several of us that wholeheartedly disagreed.

An important distinction that is becoming increasingly blurred is that civil police are to protect the people. When the law becomes the center of their focus then their role begins to take on an "us vs. them" aspect, wich is highly distructructive to society. The "people" are to be able to depend on and trust the police to protect them; sometimes from themselves.
The military has an entirely different focus, which is why the military does not make a good police force. When they are used as police civil rights and protection get trampled.

on topic
This is a tough topic because of the prevailing opinion that lying CAN be justified in certain circumstances. For the record, someone who will lie under certain circumstances cannot be relied upon to tell the truth in ALL circumstances. The line can become blurred, and perceptions may SEEM to dictate to their consciences that a lie is acceptable and prudent. This line, however, moves according to person, circumstances, pressures, mood, and other factors, both internal and external. God's character is not like this, but unchanging. A lie is a lie.
For more on this please check out the Lying and the Nazis at your door thread. It'll save time debating these things over again.

__________________
For the Glory of our King,
Joe Johnson
Married up in 1988 and blessed with two wonderful sons
TMS graduate
Preacherboy at Cornerstone Community Church, Escanaba, MI
SoundLife.org

I would like to propose a different scenario that is hinted at earlier - that of the undercover cop. Now I understand that many of you may never come across this in your life, but for those that do this can be a stressful experience when you have doubts about the morality of what you are doing. This can be taken to many other levels such as in the intelligence services or in the military. When the military deploys deceptive tactics against the enemy, isn't this a form of lying without words? Yet if it is not done, if all maneuvers are done out in the open, we all should know that this would be folly. Or what about two French students paid by the US government to go undercover into the border region of Pakistan to scout out fundamentalist activity. Should they lie when they are working for the national security of the United States? Or an FBI agent infiltrated into a Mexican drug ring? Or perhaps an MI6 IO that is collective information on a plot to blow up a transatlantic flight. Do they have the right to pretend to be someone else, or deploy some level of deception while doing their operation?

In the Bible we become familiar with biblical intelligence operations that "seem" to be sanctioned by God. Certainly he blessed them and didn't strike them down. What does this teach us about the modern world?

__________________
Fraser,
Trinity Reformed Baptist Church
Hamilton, New Zealand.

I know there were those who disagreed, but I said that the "not entitled to the truth" justification was the only major reason listed by those who think lying is not always sin.

It's either that all lying is sin, or that all lying except in the Nazi-like examples where one is not entitled to the truth is sin. There were no other reasons advanced, such as the "for a good cause."

__________________
Jeremy Gage
First Baptist Church
Durham, NC

"No heart can conceive that treasury of mercies which lies in this one privilege, in having liberty and ability to approach unto God at all times, according to his mind and will." - John Owen

I think cops and soldiers fall under the same category and military "undercover ops" is the same as stake out and undercover cop stuff. Otherwise, even a soldier wearing camoflauge is a form of a lie (deceiving others into thinking they are not there). All spy stuff then would be lies, too.

The disciples wanted to go to Jesus and didn't Jesus say he was not going..then a little later he went. I.e. he said he was not going THEN, but very soon after he went.

Gideon and his torches was a form of a military deception against an enemy...is that permissible?


The dutch hid the Jews. Armies hide their weapons, etc, husbands change the subject when wife's ask is that dress makes them look fat.....


I think there are many shades of what is lying and what is politeness, what is legitimate tactices against an enemy and what one says when others ask what they have no right to ask.

__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone

But there seems to be an acceptance here that it is the government that does it right? Just like the government holds the power of the sword. If a private company was to do undercover cop/espionage, even if for good, would it have the same immunity?

__________________
Fraser,
Trinity Reformed Baptist Church
Hamilton, New Zealand.