Resolved: The US Federal Government should significantly reform its Criminal Justice System (Policy)

I apologize for not knowing the specifics of policy debate and I will continue. Mandate 1. Similar as in exactly the same. But, this mandate is unreasonable because it relies upon a majority of Congressmen and women from both parties magically agreeing on this one issue, which they have not done so in the past. It may be the correct enforcement but, it is not reasonable to assume Congress will magically agree on this one particular issue. I have shown in the past bills pertaining to the exact thing you are arguing have not passed, therefore, it is not reasonable it will pass in the future. Mandate 2. You never answered the question of why can't an officers notes be admissible? Just because there is other evidence does not necessarily another account is bad. 2) The more safeguards the better. 3) If the suspect knows something that is not supposed to be publicized...then it would not be publicized. Funding I have provided a Senatorial Source showing you cannot estimate the cost of this policy. Even with my opponents logic there are problems. 1. My opponent has provided no working link for the 7,500 dollars, and this 7,500 dollars would be an INITIAL cost of outfitting each interrogation room. There is still the cost of where to store the recordings, etc. I mean certain states have found the cost to be as high as 30,000 dollars....per session (1), and on a federal level this could be much higher. 2. Why would each room be used only 10 times per year? I mean when conducting a case EVERYTHING must be recorded not just suspects, you have to interrogate witnesses, family, etc. Each case could bring in over 10 people that need to be interviewed/interrogated all this must be recorded. 3. Until you provide a working link I hold this number highly doubtable. And even if 175,000 people are interrogated wouldn't this number change year to year? 4. Why only 17,500 interrogation rooms? There are hundreds maybe even thousands of Department of Justice buildings simply because there are many, many different agencies and divisions under the Department of Justice. Including the FBI, USMS, BOP, ATF, DEA, OIG, INTERPOL, etc. You cannot estimate the number of rooms, simply because there are to many interrogation rooms to deal with. 5. You cannot estimate the total cost of this program (if there is more crime each year it could cost more that year then years with less crime). As for "police departments" choosing, on a federal level there are no "police departments". So would the FBI (for example) or the DOJ choose where these interrogation systems go? Advantage 1. 1. What about something like sleep deprivation? Or withholding food or water? They are considered improper tactics how can this be recorded? 2. How do you know there will be a deterrence factor? An there is never any physical abuse simply because that is to easy to spot. Police officers almost never physically abuse (as in punch for example) a suspect simply because it is counter-productive and any "evidence" received will be thrown right out. 3. There still will be unwarranted allegations whether or not this is used. The person would now complain they were "tricked" into confessing and they never actually committed the crime. Advantage 2. Wrongful Convictions 1. I have provided very credible sources, in a large police department and a University, giving these numbers. Furthermore, your source says three things AND a false confession meaning all of them tie to the false confession. So that statement was talking about false confessions. Advantage 3 and 6. There will still be pre-trials and motions. The defense will argue their suspects constitutional rights were violated by such and such. They will file motions whether or not the notes are hand-written or not. They want to win. Overwhelming the prosecutors with motions is a good way to do that. Furthermore, in order to see whether to confession was obtained legally they will have to review the ENTIRE confession. A suspect can be held legally without charges filed against them (no evidence) for 24 hours without charges being filed (and if it is a terror suspect this turns to indefinitely under the Patriot Act). Do you think the FBI is just going to let them sit there without being talked to or interrogated? No. They are going to interrogate this person extensively to try and gain information, yes. This can last for hours. All this has to be recorded and replayed as part of the trial meaning MORE TIME. Once charges are filed, they can be held until their trial date. Meaning this could be months. So guess what? More interrogations, all of which have to be recorded and replayed as evidence. More video that needs to be played=much more time spent. This is also discounting the time the prosecutors will have to use to review all of this video, who knows how long that would take. Interrogations are not short and sweet as Pro seems to think. Advantage 4. The state police are much different from the federal police. Anyway, I shall continue. Let's say for a second that it can be estimated how much it will cost the DOJ to implement this plan. The question is, how many manhours will be spent reviewing these long videos of interrogations making sure no abuse was carried out? All interrogations and interviews must be recorded. But, not all suspects confess to a crime, even if they committed the crime. These interrogations are long and they will have to be reviewed. Time is money. How can a defendant claim physical abuse? Physical abuse causes bodily harm. If there is no actual evidence they were abused....they were not abused. Advantage 5. My opponent seems to think this is what will happen in an interrogation. "Suspect: I didn't do it...I never jumbled up my words. Interrogator: wait a second while I go review what you said on the video screen outside" That will never happen. The interrogator is not going to get up. They still will have to take notes as to recall what the suspect said earlier in the interrogation as to use it against them later. The only difference now is their notes will not be admissible as evidence. but, they still will have to take them. Significance A questionable, 175,000 suspects are interrogated each year for hours on end. Another half of a million non-suspects, and witnesses are questioned for hours at a time. This means hours and hours of video and sound have to be reviewed by the prosecutors. Time is money. This will take much more time costing much more money. Conclusion: I believe I have resolved the issue of "fiat power" in stating it is unreasonable to assume Congress will suddenly come to an agreement on this issue when they have not done so in the past. My evidence is completely valid. The two bills show your first mandate is unreasonable to assume. False confessions being extremely rare is completely relevant as it is one reason to put it in place. My opponents advantages can be summed up as such: 1. Protection- my opponent has not showed there will in every case be a deterrence factor. 2. Decreased wrongful convictions- over false confessions which happen rarely 3. Money- logically, prosecutors and defense attorneys will have to review hours of video and sound. Time is money. 4. Increased evidence- the Interrogator will still take notes. Source: 1. http://www.legis.nd.gov...