In regard to checking a residence for a fugitive, when the investigation develops …show more content…
With an arrest warrant, if the residence is that of the fugitive and the deputy has reasonable belief that the subject is inside, forced entry may be used. (See Payton v New York, 445 U.S. 573,603) If there is an independent showing that the subject of an arrest warrant is located within a third party residence, absent exigent circumstances, a search warrant should be obtained before gaining entry. (See Steagald v. United States, 451 U.S. 204 (1981)). If the subject fugitive is in the residence of a crime partner and it is believed that evidence of the crime is also present, a search warrant should be obtained before gaining entry. Evidence of third party crime may be seized if it is in plain view from a position where the DUSM has a lawful right to …show more content…
The Fifth Amendment guarantees the suspect's right against self-incrimination. The Sixth Amendment expressly guarantees his right to counsel in a criminal proceeding. I am an advocate of children and although I would be tempted to water board a person of interest, if I suspected he or she knew the whereabouts of a missing child, there are laws that must be adhered to. When children go missing, time is of the essence and I have heard of detectives taking off the gloves to obtain the necessary information without consequences; however, this is risky since information or a coerced confession cannot be used in a court of law, so allowing personal bias could become problematic. I have heard mention of the come to Jesus philosophy, which can be effective; however, this is ineffectual with sociopaths/psychopaths. Law enforcement can use (1) suggestibility, (2) deception, (3) verbal and non-verbal cues, (4) good cop/bad cop, (5) pride and ego down, and (6) Reid technique (Thompson,