Respond to the post below.

In The case of Brewer v. Williams* (1977), Williams the suspect was arrested for murder. During the interview he confused to the crime due to the specific line of questioning used by the investigators. The investigator utilized a technique known as "the Christian burial speech," where he expressed sympathy and moral arguments to persuade Williams to reveal information about the location of the victim's body.

Interview Style

The interview technique used by the investigator in this case was both persuasive and empathetic. The investigator played on Williams's sense of morality and religious conscience, emphasizing on the importance of the family giving the victim a proper burial. Taking this approach was intended to help create a sense of guilt and compassion that would later lead Williams to disclose information in regards to the crime voluntarily.

Ethical and Legal Implications

The Court found that the investigator's approach violated Williams's Sixth Amendment right to counsel. The key ethical and legal issue was that Williams had already been assigned a lawyer, and the investigator's speech constituted an interrogation that occurred in the absence of legal counsel. This breach undermined the fairness of the interrogation process and violated Williams's constitutional rights.

The Supreme Court ruled that the investigator's tactics amounted to an illegal interrogation because Williams had not been advised of his right to have an attorney present. The court found that the investigator's statements, although seemingly sympathetic, were designed to elicit a confession in a context where Williams was entitled to legal representation.

Preventative Measures

The investigator could have avoided this outcome by refraining from engaging in direct questioning or making persuasive statements designed to elicit a confession in the absence of Williams's attorney. Instead, the investigator should have respected Williams's right to legal counsel and avoided any actions that could be seen as coercive or manipulative. Adhering strictly to procedural safeguards and ensuring that any interactions with the suspect were conducted in the presence of legal counsel would have prevented the legal issues that arose in this case.

In summary, while the investigator's style of using sympathy might be effective in some contexts, it was legally and ethically problematic in this situation due to the absence of the suspect's attorney. Proper adherence to legal protocols is crucial to ensure that confessions and information obtained during interviews are admissible and uphold the rights of the accused.