(1) Violence and the Threat of Violence.
(2) Unfair interrogation.
(3) Creating unfair mental stress.
(4) Use of Unfair Trick.
(5) Unfair seduction and intimidation."
Needless to say,, Because, In this context, This is not a closed list, and by virtue of the ruling, more have been added "Invalid ancestors" Example, "Legal Advice" of the interrogator to the interrogee and- "The suggestive monologue". These two were discussed inCriminal Appeal 10049/08 Rateb Abu Issa 50' State of Israel [Posted inNevo] (23.8.12).
Regarding the issue of legal advice, See - Section 81 To the judgment in the matter Abu Issa:
"..., I do not believe that this interrogation trick is legitimate since the interrogator's role does not include providing legal advice to the interrogee, Legal advice is certainly not misleading and it is better for the investigator not to penetrate the legal advice area reserved for lawyer relations-Client Only. The role of the investigator is to investigate and uncover facts and not to deal with the legal interpretation of the factual set, An action that by its nature is reserved for legal advice that can be given to the interrogator by his defense attorney."
And regarding the suggestive monologue, In the section 90 Judgment Abu Issa, It was noted as follows:
"... Method "The suggestive monologue" It is a method of psychological investigation in which a process of repeated persuasion is taken over a long period of time, Non-stop, In order to influence the interrogee's resistance force. The purpose of this method is "Break" the power of the interrogee's resistance in order to motivate him to make a confession without being able to make voluntary and informed use of the silence available to him. Damping, In my opinion, This method of interrogation is fundamentally invalid because it contradicts a basic principle in criminal law - The right to self-incrimination - By eroding or even canceling the interrogee's free will."