Torture, in exceptional circumstances

Kylta

The vast majority of people are against torture (I think).
But say you had a serial child killer in prison, who would not give up were they buried the bodies of his victims so the families could buried their loved ones.
If you could sign off on him being tortured by the state or an independent body, until he revealed the whereabouts of bodies. (Again the persons guilt is unquestionable!)
Would you personally sign off on it?

If a member of my family was the victim, absolutely. Otherwise no.

This is why we don't allow decisions to be made by people who would act emotionally.

Kylta

Deleted User wrote: »

If a member of my family was the victim, absolutely. Otherwise no.

This is why we don't allow decisions to be made by people who would act emotionally.

What if it was the neighbours child. Or your childs classmate?

Anybody emotionally involved in torture wouldn't be thinking straight anyway. Your first thought might be to retrieve the missing body, but your main thought would be vengeance

gifted

Don't think so......just lock them up in a cell for the rest of his/her life for 24hrs a day......no exercise...no contact with anyone else.....I think that's torture enough. Deservedly though

Kylta

gifted wrote: »

Don't think so......just lock them up in a cell for the rest of his/her life for 24hrs a day......no exercise...no contact with anyone else.....I think that's torture enough.

Thats agreeable but how do resolve the issue of the missing bodies? And suppose one of the missing is related to your family?

jam_mac_jam

No. I wouldn't sign off on it. It's never justified and in many cases doesn't give good information.

In the example sited it would give you the information, but has that ever happened, is it likely to happen? Also the people are dead already so no.

It's not for civilised countries to do.

Quantum Erasure

What defines 'exceptional'...? In this case were looking for the certain location of dead bodies, would the probable knowledge of the location of a live bomb count?

In reality it probably happens all the time, anyway

Feisar

Wasn't there a film/mini series a few years back where bombs were planted and they were trying to get the info out of the bombers as to where the bombs were (on timers). The end justifies the means and all that.

Or if someone has unsolicited bum bum sex with ya:

Royal Irish

I'd be in favor of enhanced interrogation being used like sleep deprivation, water boarding, etc. But no pulling finger nails or anything barbaric like that.

Feisar

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

What defines 'exceptional'...? In this case were looking for the certain location of dead bodies, would the probable knowledge of the location of a live bomb count?

In reality it probably happens all the time, anyway

Beat me to it on the live bomb.

Oranage2

And who'd do the torturing?

I couldn't condone actions I wouldn't do myself.

Dravokivich

Torture isn't likely to give you the information you want. All it does, is allow you to play out your frustration, due to not getting any information or punishing the interviewee for being uncooperative. Which is what happened in "Prisoners," as the viewer knows, the one being tortured, is also a victim of the kidnappers being chased down.

Pauliedragon

Nothing to do with torture but in Australia they brought in laws a while back which meant if you were convicted of murder with no body you never get parole unless you reveal where the body is.

Rhyme

If they are the kind of person to kill children, then they might get a buzz out of stringing along an investigation and sending them off to dig in the wrong place.

Torturing them would be more likely get them to clam up and say nothing or do what torture has done in the past, get the person to say what they think the person wants to hear rather than anything useful. Victims of torture have been known to admit to crimes that they didn't commit and invent entire stories to avoid being tortured.

There's a good book called Mindhunter by John E. Douglas (TV show came after) where they detail getting information from psychopaths and serial killers and it's never as simple as kicking the crap out them (as therapeutic as that may be for the person doing it).

Feisar

Oranage2 wrote: »

And who'd do the torturing?

I couldn't condone actions I wouldn't do myself.

The torture squad? Couple of coked up ex ra heads? I dunno I'm sure if we scrapped the barrel we'd find a few suitable operatives.

Dravokivich

Pauliedragon wrote: »

Nothing to do with torture but in Australia they brought in laws a while back which meant if you were convicted of murder with no body you never get parole unless you reveal where the body is.

That's no use for someone wrongly convicted of murder.

Gregor Samsa

Dravokivich wrote: »

That's no use for someone wrongly convicted of murder.

Yeah, but neither is the parole process. You don't get parole because you were wrongly convicted - if you can show that you're wrongly convicted, your conviction is overturned, and you're released outright.

Gatling

Advanced interrogation .

If you refuse to give up the location of a body then you do not leave prison ,

o1s1n

Royal Irish wrote: »

I'd be in favor of enhanced interrogation being used like sleep deprivation, water boarding, etc. But no pulling finger nails or anything barbaric like that.

I'd consider those things torture tbh. 'Advanced interrogation' reads too much like a Bush administration buzz phrase.

Ever see when Christopher Hitchens elected to have it done? He barely lasted a second.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LPubUCJv58

Talking about it here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2EptxXczx4

Zebra3

Royal Irish wrote: »

I'd be in favor of enhanced interrogation being used like sleep deprivation, water boarding, etc. But no pulling finger nails or anything barbaric like that.

Water boarding a bit of craic, then?

granturismo

Royal Irish wrote: »

I'd be in favor of enhanced interrogation being used like sleep deprivation, water boarding, etc. But no pulling finger nails or anything barbaric like that.

How did ecnhanced interrogation work out for The Hooded Men.

JohnnyFlash

You’ve never heard my ex-wife nagging.

Pauliedragon

Dravokivich wrote: »

That's no use for someone wrongly convicted of murder.

I agree but torture won't help either if the person is innocent and genuinely doesn't know where the body is.

MFPM

There is no argument for torture legal or moral in my view. Quite apart from anything else there are many studies that indicate the unreliability of of information gleaned from torture methods.

MFPM

Royal Irish wrote: »

I'd be in favor of enhanced interrogation being used like sleep deprivation, water boarding, etc. But no pulling finger nails or anything barbaric like that.

Like the US military used against innocent people across their torture camps in the Middle East and in Gunatanamo...Look where that got them.

Gatling

Zebra3 wrote: »

Water boarding a bit of craic, then?

Should give it a go.


Waterboarding with pints is a laugh

jam_mac_jam

Water boarding is horrific torture and is not justified to get information. Japanese soldiers were convicted of war crimes due to it's use in WW2.

Yet now it's just a light torture. Also used by the Gestapo, but maybe they had exceptional reasons too.

El_Duderino 09

Royal Irish wrote: »

I'd be in favor of enhanced interrogation being used like sleep deprivation, water boarding, etc. But no pulling finger nails or anything barbaric like that.

What's the difference between those types of torture? what makes one type of torture a good idea and the other type of torture a bad idea?

TheBlackPill

Sleep deprivation is probably the best to get people to give up information.
Waterboarding is very quick in getting somebody to submit and talk,, but they will say anything to prevent further waterboarding, so the information is useless unless used to corroborate something already known.
Torture is useless anyway. A well briefed, skilled interrogator(or team) is the way to go.
I suggest most torture is really just a power trip for the torturer dressed up as being necessary to prevent loss of life etc

Ten of Swords

Feisar wrote: »

Wasn't there a film/mini series a few years back where bombs were planted and they were trying to get the info out of the bombers as to where the bombs were (on timers). The end justifies the means and all that

Unthinkable

Michael Sheen tortured by Samuel L Jackson for the location of a nuclear bomb

Gregor Samsa

TheBlackPill wrote: »

Sleep deprivation is probably the best to get people to give up information.

I don't know, I don't tend to make much sense when I'm tired.

ShatterAlan

Kylta wrote: »

Thats agreeable but how do resolve the issue of the missing bodies? And suppose one of the missing is related to your family?

The Russians didn't torture Chikatillo to get him to confess to the multiple murders he committed and where to locate the bodies. They employed a psychiatrist and got all the information out of the killer that way.


Then they shot him.

ShatterAlan

Royal Irish wrote: »

I'd be in favor of enhanced interrogation being used like sleep deprivation, water boarding, etc. But no pulling finger nails or anything barbaric like that.

I take it you're joking.

Fuascailteoir

In the pilot of the shield, a child abductor was in an interrogation call when they called in mackey to find out where a missing child was. The abductor sat back and said ok you must be the bad cop. The reply was no, the good cop and the bad cop are gone home for the day, I am a different type of cop. Set the whole series up for what was to come

ShatterAlan

Gatling wrote: »

Advanced interrogation .

If you refuse to give up the location of a body then you do not leave prison ,

Ahh, someone who likes to sugarcoat torture by giving it a different name. Something that the squeamish can handle.

Gregor Samsa

ShatterAlan wrote: »

The Russians didn't torture Chikatillo to get him to confess to the multiple murders he committed and where to locate the bodies. They employed a psychiatrist and got all the information out of the killer that way.


Then they shot him.

They also shot the guy (Aleksandr Kravchenko) wrongly convicted of Chikatillo's first murder. One of the things that led to Kravchenko's (wrongful) conviction was testimony extracted from witnesses via "enhanced interrogation techniques".

Quantum Erasure

Feisar wrote: »

The torture squad? Couple of coked up ex ra heads? I dunno I'm sure if we scrapped the barrel we'd find a few suitable operatives.

You'd find plenty willing to do it on Facebook, or boards even, if you go by the reaction to horrific cases reported in the media....

MarkR

Hasn't torture been deemed ineffective over and over again?

https://journalistsresource.org/studies/government/security-military/does-torture-work-research-says-no/

I'm sure it might feel good to some in a retribution sense, but if they'll confess to being the Easter bunny, because they're testicles are in a vice, then what's the point?

Edgware

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Water boarding is horrific torture and is not justified to get information. Japanese soldiers were convicted of war crimes due to it's use in WW2.

Yet now it's just a light torture. Also used by the Gestapo, but maybe they had exceptional reasons too.

How else would you expect Klaus Barbie and co deal with those nasty French Resistance gangs?

TuringBot47

As far as I know, physical torture only makes people tell the torturer what they want to know, whether that's based on fact or not.

I genuinely hope in the future, that brain/computer interfaces work so well that people can be forced to take a non-invasive scan to determine their guilt.
Also that that scan is backed by evidence, not just that they "think" they are guilty.

Mad_maxx

Kylta wrote: »

The vast majority of people are against torture (I think).
But say you had a serial child killer in prison, who would not give up were they buried the bodies of his victims so the families could buried their loved ones.
If you could sign off on him being tortured by the state or an independent body, until he revealed the whereabouts of bodies. (Again the persons guilt is unquestionable!)
Would you personally sign off on it?

id offer to carry out the torture personally if it was a family member

TheBlackPill

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

I don't know, I don't tend to make much sense when I'm tired.

Its about producing a dissociative state/fugue through exhaustion. Some drugs produce a similar effect but are unpredictable. It goes beyond tired. An example would be a junior surgeon on call over a bank holiday weekend. Able to do the appendectomy on tuesday but very vulnerable to suggestion and manipulation

Victor

Kylta wrote: »

The vast majority of people are against torture (I think). But say you had a serial child killer in prison, who would not give up were they buried the bodies of his victims so the families could buried their loved ones. If you could sign off on him being tortured by the state or an independent body, until he revealed the whereabouts of bodies. (Again the persons guilt is unquestionable!) Would you personally sign off on it?

No. What makes you think a serial child killer would react as you intend?

Mad_maxx wrote: »

id offer to carry out the torture personally if it was a family member

What makes you think you would be competent to do it?

ShatterAlan

Mad_maxx wrote: »

id offer to carry out the torture personally if it was a family member

You just admitted to seeking revenge rather than getting results.

MarkR

Victor wrote: »

What makes you think you would be competent to do it?

Hello? He's mad!

TheAnalyst_

Never. Not torture, no capital punishment whatever the crime.

kowloon

TuringBot47 wrote: »

I genuinely hope in the future, that brain/computer interfaces work so well that people can be forced to take a non-invasive scan to determine their guilt.
Also that that scan is backed by evidence, not just that they "think" they are guilty.

Being able to just read someone to see if they did it would change everything. At that level of tech I wonder if we would be far off being able to "fix" people with conditions likely to lead to violence before they ever commit a crime.
At that stage we run into the situation where a killing might be seen as a failure by the authorities rather than the responsibility of the killer.
Would there be any point in punishing someone when their condition was something that slipped through the net in a standard medical of the future designed to catch these things?

Sardonicat

Gatling wrote: »

Advanced interrogation .

If you refuse to give up the location of a body then you do not leave prison ,

That didn't bother Ian Brady, did it? On the contrary, he dangled the idea he could reveal the location of Keith Bennet's body over the heads of his family up to the day he died, including red herring sealed envelopes to be opened after his death and other twisted sh1t. He got a kick out of the fact that Keith's mother, Winnie Johnson, and his brother's spent their weekends searching for the lad's remains on Saddleworth more. He was able to torture that family for decades and they are still tortured to this day.

I don't know, I'm against the death penalty and I'm against torture but I think there must be something wrong with the person who's instinct doesn't scream at them that Brady and his equally vile accomplice should have got a bullet to the back of the head. For what it's worth, I don't believe Brady would have revealed the location of Keith's remains under torture. He got too much if a thrill from the power not revealing it gave him.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

If an animal killed a person, and we locked them in a cage for the rest of their natural life, it would be considered cruelty. It's more humane to just euthanize them!

Yet for some strange reason, we think locking murderers etc up for life is the more humane action. Why? What's the difference?

Locking anyone up for years, human or animal, is an act of mental torture... we should either rehabilitate and release, or euthanize those who are too dangerous to release.

Kylta

Kylta wrote: »

The vast majority of people are against torture (I think).
But say you had a serial child killer in prison, who would not give up were they buried the bodies of his victims so the families could buried their loved ones.
If you could sign off on him being tortured by the state or an independent body, until he revealed the whereabouts of bodies. (Again the persons guilt is unquestionable!)
Would you personally sign off on it?

Would I have to use my real name? Plus, you should know that I can't really use pens that leave a lot of ink on the page, I'm left-handed so using one of those type of pens tends to smudge what I'm writing, unless I write really slowly and give the ink time to dry. Which wouldn't be ideal, given time is probably a factor here.

Maybe... Would it be OK to use a typewriter, do you think? Do Prisons still use typewriters? God, where's an AMA with a member of the Admin staff from a prison when you really need one!

Archeron

Would a torturers hood be considered a facemask or would they need to wear another mask underneath? Covid really has changed the workplace.