Why aren't criminals hypnotised or given a "truth drug" to get them to reveal the locations of victims bodies?

Blue Steel & Lace

Here in the US, you have to have a court order signed by a judge, and because it is considered a dangerous and invasive procedure to give a truth drug to anyone, it is almost never granted.

Korey

Simple. Hypnotisim (sp?) isn't a proven method of getting real information. This means that it has not been scientifically proven to actually work; therefore the court of law will not allow this type of method.

It's kind of like with lie detector tests. Not all States recognize it as a "true test". In fact lie detector test results are inadmissible in the court of law.

Alan S

Why not use a ball/peen hammer and start breaking finger bones and toe bones until they cough up info? Or waterboard them? Or peeling pieces of skin off with a butter knife? Could it be because it's just wrong to do such things?

I'm as cool as ice cubes

they actually did this back in the wars. They would give the prisoners truth drugs (it was LSD) to try and make them give up locations and information about there armies. I dont think it was very effective

Enchanted

Undue force. sorry - criminals have certain rights. the only way that could happen is if the criminal him/herself gave permission. The state cannot force someone against their own freewill.

Evan B

Using your reasoning, we should give truth drugs to everyone any time someone has been murdered.

auroraresearchinstitute

there's at least 2 issues here. One is how reliable is the "truth serum". Like does it always work? Probably a certain percentage of the population does not respond so in those cases, the dose will be increased until you reach a lethal dose amount and they die. Then maybe the answer they gave you may be wrong or misleading.
The other issue is that once the 'truth serum' is administered, you can ask other questions for other information like maybe get tips for insider trading or personal information on someone else. You may not be able to control what questions are asked.

vdv_desantnik

firstly truth drugs are unreliable, secondly civil liberties groups and do-gooders cry 'human rights abuse' (yet forget the rights of the victim)

Heidi.

Good idea but there are too many do gooders in this world who harp on about human rights and don't live in the real world with us. The minute someone commits a crime and can't live like a civilised being then they don't deserve to live like one.

truthspeaker10

1) Hypnosis doesn't work like that.
2) "truth drugs" as they are called are actually quite cruel, they hurt the person they are administered to. Plus they are dangerous.

Gawain

The law doesnt like doing that kind of thing. Usually.

georgeygirl

Great idea in theory but as you say it's not guaranteed and if somebody has mental illness or are psychotic or have blacked out during a crime then they would not remember and hence could be let off as being innocent when they are clearly guilty. Plus the fact criminals keep the fat cat lawyers and the police in work. In fact they need criminals to be employed.

mad keith

good one and i agree this should be done how ever thay have human rights which is wrong the humane thay killed had the right to life you take a life therefore you should give up your right and if needed your life too

fleur

Interesting! I know they use lie detectors in some parts of the US, and most psychologists believe they are useless, so why not try something less conventional? That said, 'truth drugs' don't work, apparently, and as for hypnosis, only certain types of people can be hypnotised, so it's a crapshoot.

starryeyed

I tend to be pragmatic about many issues, and I tend to believe very much in physiological and neurological psychology.
The way you asked the question, I was with you.
I don't even care if the drug hurts the prisoner, if the prisoner confessed under no duress (yeah, OK), or if the DNA evidence is strong enough...
But when I read otehr answers, I got the idea that the drugs may be pretty haphazard.
I don't care for prisoners' rights so much in this case, so long as long-term brain damage, organ damage, or death will not ensue.
But to hurt people with no valid result basis?
Well, I hate to have been wrong.

Kathy M

probably because it infringes on civil rights.... it should be allowed, but the constitution is the constitution and what it says, goes

Quizard

because the people who think more of criminal's rights than those of the victims and their families would be up in arms.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: