our current police investigation procedure is stated below:
if you say you did the crime and you are guilty, you will be treated like a king.
nobody even touch you.
but if you say you did not do the crime and you are not guilty, then you will be
given 3rd degree torture, narco test "to make you tell the truth."
the presumption of this practice is that "YOU ARE GUILTY".
but the question is that if police know that you are guilty, they must have
evidence against you. why just they don't place you before court with evidence ?
why torture to make you tell "the truth?"
some will say that police need clues of crime. thats why they torture you to get a
clue? but then why torture? why not simply interrogate? if the man lies, he will be
caught and then he will be interrogated again.
this kind of investigation practice will show just one thing that POLICE DON'T USE THEIR BRAIN TO KNOW THE TRUTH. rather they distort the truth to make innocent people suffer.
this kind of practice is against right of personal liberty. hence it is unconstitutional too.
what do you think?