this is the essay topic:
A suspected terrorist is arrested in connection with an imminent terror threat. A bomb has been discovered at a local shopping center. The timer shows that the bomb will detonate in 2 hours. The man in custody is believed to be the bomb maker and the only person who knows how to disable/detonate the bomb. You and your partner are police officers assigned to this case. You both have been brought in to interrogate the suspect. An hour passes, and you havent made any progress. Your partner unplugs all of the recording equipment and asks you to leave the room. Twenty minutes later the officer exits the room with the code to deactivate the bomb. You look inside the room to find the suspect unconscious and his face covered in blood. Your partner asks you to back up his story that the suspect became aggressive during the interrogation and that he was simply defending himself. There is no tape to challenge your version of the events. It would be the terrorists word against yours. With the deativation code received, the bomb was deactivated potentially saving thousands of lives.
QUESTIONS: Would you follow your partners instructions? Why or why not? Is the use of police interrogation torture ever justified for a greater good? You should present both sides to this argument and then indicate what you ultimately believe. Be sure to include in your answer the ethical and legal consequences of your decision.
