More handpicked essays just for you.
Interview example to police officer
Reflection about criminal investigation
Crime scene investigation process
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
“What crime do you believe you committed?” I asked the insane man. I was in my office with him, patiently waiting for an answer that I knew wouldn’t be true. This man had killed another man. I didn’t know either of their names, and I didn’t have any other information about this man other than that he was a caregiver to an old man with a cataract. I was determined to find out more about this man and if he needed any special care. “I have committed no crimes in my life, unless you count stealing a grape out of the bag at the grocery store.” the man said with a laugh. He was trying to be funny-- I was not in a joking mood. “Sir, I know what you have done, so you might as well tell me the truth so we can make this meeting short and sweet.” “I told you, I did nothing.” the man said with gritted teeth. He was starting to get mad, so I called in a security guard to protect me in case he tried to …show more content…
The older man’s name is Bob Wilson, and he was diagnosed with a cataract in his left eye when he was 55. There was a report earlier tonight about a scream that came from his house, but Henry told us it was a scream that came from a nightmare of his. Our officers continued to question Bob’s whereabouts, and Henry said he was ‘absent in the country.’ Our officers searched his house, and the guilt must’ve gotten to him, because he went crazy and confessed to the murder of his uncle, Bob Wilson. My officers must have brought him down to be questioned by you, and now we’re here.” the chief told me. “Mr. Wilson told me that he had committed no crimes, and that he was guilty of nothing, but I knew what had happened. I told him to be back in my office in the morning, and if he didn’t confess he would have to be further examined.” as I told the chief this, he looked surprised. “My officers said that he immediately confessed as soon as they sat down to talk, and he was physically going crazy and covering his
The man and woman had been laid out side-by-side next to a crab-apple tree. The man had a hat covering his face and the woman’s head rested on the man’s right arm. Torn bits of paper lay between the bodies (later found to be love letters between the two). A calling card was propped up against one of the man’s shoes. The killer or killers had taken the time to arrange the bodies after they were dead.” (MacGowan.) The murderer had set the dead bodies in such a way that it looked like they were just enjoying the beautiful day in the sun. There were torn love letters between them and the man’s face was covered by a hat. Mary S. Hartman wrote a quote from Mr. Hamborszky, “"Mrs. Hall is a very cool woman. She has changed very much lately, and I am very much afraid that she will do me bodily harm." Was Hamborszky lying? We'll never know. He vanished on the eve of the trial in 1926.” (Hartman.) Mr. Hamborszky once said "Mrs. Hall is a very cool woman. She has changed very much lately, and I am very much afraid that she will do me bodily harm". We didn’t know if he was lying or not because he then disappeared the eve of the trial. Mary S. Hartman once said in her article, “By now, all the principals in this celebrated affair are long dead. There is no telling whether the truth of the identity of the murderer or murderers will ever be uncovered, but the documents themselves have many other truths to tell
On November 29, 2004 Nancy Seaman, an award winning elementary school teacher, was put on trial for the murder of her husband Robert “Bob” Seaman. On May 10th of that year, Nancy hit her husband sixteen times with a hatchet and then preceded to stab him twenty-one times with a kitchen knife. She then cleaned herself up and then went to work as usual. After she returned from her job, Nancy bleached, painted, and scrubbed to clean the garage where she had killed her husband. Then, she wrapped up Bob’s body in a tarp and put it in the trunk of her car. The interesting point of the case is not finding out who killed Robert Seaman, but what the circumstances were for committing the crime.
A 43 year old detective Patrick Maloney, husband of Mary Maloney was found dead in his ‘loving’ home on the evening of September 16th, 1954 around 11:00pm. Mary was heartbroken when she came home and found her beloved husband lying dead on the ground. However, the cause of death was a mystery. When the police had arrived at the scene of the crime, it had looked like someone broke into their home and that they were looking for something. The police had investigated for hours but couldn’t seem to find any evidence or a specific lead. The only information that Mary could provide was that he seemed a little ‘off’ coming home from work that he had been stressed out about something.
Because police investigators are usually under pressure to arrest criminals and safeguard the community, they often make mistakes. Sometimes, detectives become convinced of a suspect 's guilt because of their criminal history or weak speculations. Once they are convinced, they are less likely to consider alternative possibilities. They overlook some important exculpatory evidence, make weak speculations and look only for links that connect a suspect to a crime, especially if the suspect has a previous criminal record. Picking Cotton provides an understanding of some common errors of the police investigation process. During Ronald Cottons interrogation, the detectives did not bother to record the conversation “But I noticed he wasn 't recording the conversation, so I felt that he could be writing anything down”(79) unlike they did for Jennifer. They had already labelled Ronald Cotton as the perpetrator and they told him during the interrogation “Cotton, Jennifer Thompson already identified you. We know it was you”(82). Jenifer Thompson 's testimony along with Ronald Cotton 's past criminal records gave the detectives more reason to believe Ronald committed the crime. Ronald Cotton stated “ This cop Sully, though, he had already decided I was guilty.”(84). Many investigative process have shortcomings and are breached because the officials in charge make
The problem with unrecorded interrogations is that videotaped confessions are often entered into court as evidence without allowing the judge or jury to observe the circumstances under which the confession was given. In a recent case, 52-year-old Conrado Juarez confessed to the 1991 rape and murder of his cousin, Anjelica Castillo, known in the media as Baby Hope (McKinley & Goldstein, 2013). The four-year-old girl’s body had been found in a cooler on the side of the Henry Hudson Parkway and gone unidentified until October 2013 when Juarez confessed to helping his now deceased sister move her body there. After 12 hours of interrogation, however, Juarez confessed much more. The confession was videotaped, but the 12-hour long interrogation was not. Juarez retracted his confession soon afterwards, claiming that he was exhausted from the prolonged questioning and...
However, the following statement coming from him shows that he is firm and of no guilt of what he had done. In addition, the words he uttered shows that he is trying to make the interrogator guilty of a crime as well. He had this aim to dig into the conscience of the interrogator.
As he wakes up, he gets dressed and gets ready for school, throws on some jeans, a nice shirt and his letterman's jacket and heads downstairs, he hears the tv the Channel 5 news “And now on Channel 5 news the first killing in 25 years in Hillsborough, California” with shock on his face he reacts with a loud “WHAT! We know everyone here who would do something like that?” “At this moment we have no information on the suspect or suspects if you have any information please call your local police station.” Said the female news anchor “The victim has been identified as local high school Senior and football star Brock Sanders we was stabbed 72 times in the chest, stomach and neck.” Said
In the court of law, confessions are very important. Not only could it crack a case, but also result in a fair trial as well. The type of confession consist of, but not limited to the following: coerced and compliant false confession (Hritz, Blau and Tomezsko, 2010). Both confessions are different in their own ways and have the ability to affect the overall outcome of a case. Coerced confessions, for example, is when a confession is forced by the law enforcement and force a person to confess for a crime he or she didn’t do with intention to inflict harm (“False and Coerced Confessions,” 2016). A police officer who is involved with
What exactly goes on behind the closed doors of law enforcement interrogation rooms remains an object of mystery, especially to the public. The object that remains an even larger mystery, perhaps, is how these interrogations can possibly lead to innocent people giving a false confession. Through many factors and methods, some interrogations take a turn for the worse. Police interrogations can occasionally lead to false confessions due to misclassification of charges, coercion of the accused, and contamination of evidence.
... witness box he broke down completely, weeping, clasping his hands and saying, 'I swear to you, sir, my wife is innocent.' The magistrate sternly told him to control himself, and began to question him. Bit by bit the true story came out.
“Please raise your right hand to take the oath” the officer says. Silence washes over the courtroom. “Do you solemnly swear that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, (so help you God/under pains and penalties of perjury)?” “Yes” She says. She sitting right next to the judge, microphone right in front of her. She sits there looking around the courtroom. She sees him there sitting calmly with no worries about what’s happening. She wonders if they’ll believe her, they have to believe her, there's evidence. I hope the jurors would see past his good boy facade. I hope they really see him for what he is. A rapist. I get introduced to the court and so the nightmare begins. The trial begins, and the lawyers begin
He said “You have been detained for attempting to break into the queen's lock safe.”
"Just as well that you witnessed with your own eyes what I couldn't tell you myself. Now, what's your plan?"
The fixation on the old man's vulture-like eye forces the narrator to concoct a plan to eliminate the old man. The narrator confesses the sole reason for killing the old man is his eye: "Whenever it fell upon me, my blood ran cold; and so by degrees - very gradually - I made up my mind to rid myself of the eye for ever" (34). The narrator begins his tale of betrayal by trying to convince the reader he is not insane, but the reader quickly surmises the narrator indeed is out of control. The fact that the old man's eye is the only motivation to murder proves the narrator is so mentally unstable that he must search for justification to kill. In his mind, he rationalizes murder with his own unreasonable fear of the eye.
 3 years later, the proof of his innocence appeared. Yet, the high-ranking officers refused to open the cased.