I understand that trickery and deception are acceptable practices in police interrogations within certain limits. However, can police manufacture documents (e.g., lab reports, DNA reports, fingerprint reports) that implicate the suspect to further the deception and obtain a confession. Any case law would be appreciated.

Buy and read TDCAA's fine book on Confessions by John Stride and John Rolator, both frequent contributors to this forum.

Investigators might also want to get their offices to purchase a copy of Criminal Interrogations and Confessions, by Inbau, Reid, Buckely, & Jayne (4th Ed). Though it runs about $80 it is a most practical how-to manual on the Reid Techinque for investigators and has a useful section on the law. It is a good companion to the Confessions manual.

This question had been asked a couple of times in a DNA course I do, so I checked with Norm Gahn, ADA in Milwaukee, WI. Norm has served as a subject matter expert in all things DNA, and he says that the practice would be "iffy, at best."

He mentioned a case that is before the WA supreme court in which investigators used a fabricated letterhead from a ficticious law firm and a self addressed stamped envelope to obtain the suspect's DNA. The suspect, thinking he was about to receive a large sum of money from a class action suit, filled out the info form, licked and sealed the envelope, and mailed it back to the "law firm."

In the scenario posed, it seems that the "iffy" part has to do with the fictional lab report that you are holding before the suspect, asserting that you have scientific evidence that connects him to the crime. He said he hasn't heard of any cases where the tactic has been challenged, but folks are watching the WA case to see how far it reaches into that realm.

Reid books are available at www.reid.com