Skip to main content
Contribution to Book
Interrogation through Pragmatic Implication: Sticking to the Letter of the Law While Violating its Intent
Oxford Handbook on Language and Law (2010)
  • Deborah Davis
  • Richard A. Leo
Abstract

In response to increasing evidence that police interrogation procedures can and do elicit false confessions from innocent suspects, American Courts have offered guidelines intended to protect suspects from coercive interrogations and to ensure the voluntariness and reliability of any confessions obtained. However, faced with legal prohibitions against police promotion of suspect confessions through use of physical coercion or explicit incentives for confession, American police interrogation tactics have evolved to rely on the use of pragmatic implication to nevertheless convey strong incentives for suspects to confess guilt—practices that have essentially diluted or circumvented the intended protections and that have continued to elicit false as well as true confessions. This chapter outlines the sequence of common American police interrogation procedures, with emphasis on specific wording and tactics making use of pragmatic implication—in violation of the intent of the law-- to convey promises of leniency for confession or harsher treatment in response to continued denial.

Keywords
  • interrogation,
  • false confession,
  • pragmatic implication,
  • police
Disciplines
Publication Date
2010
Editor
L. Solan & P. Tiersma
Publisher
Oxford
Citation Information
Deborah Davis and Richard A. Leo. "Interrogation through Pragmatic Implication: Sticking to the Letter of the Law While Violating its Intent" Oxford Handbook on Language and Law (2010)
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/richardleo/11/