In Canada this is governed by the
R. v. Oickle Supreme Court decision:
Quote:
|
First, the court must consider whether the police made any threats or promises. Iacobucci states that whether there is a quid pro quo for the confession will usually determined whether it was voluntary. Second, the court must look for oppression. That is, where there is distasteful or inhumane conduct that would amount to an involuntary confession. Third, The court must consider whether the suspect has an operating mind. The suspect is sufficiently aware of what he or she is saying and who they are saying it to. Lastly, the court can consider the degree of police trickery. While trickery in general is allowed it cannot go so far as to "shock the community".
|
It seems like a sensible decision to me. Plenty is weighed when determining the admissibility of confessions.