CURRENT CRITICISM REGARDING PROCEDURES OF POLICE INTERROGATION INCLUDE THE CLAIM THAT SUSPECTS ARE NOT SUFFICIENTLY SAFEGUARDED FROM ACTUAL OR POTENTIAL POLICE MISCONDUCT OR FROM THE POSSIBILITY OF WRONGFUL CONVICTION ON THE BASIS OF EVIDENCE PRESENTED FROM POLICE QUESTIONING. ON THE OTHER HAND, IT IS ARGUED THAT THE POLICE ARE UNDULY HANDICAPPED IN OBTAINING AND USING EVIDENCE THAT WOULD ESTABLISH THE GUILT OF OFFENDERS AT TRIAL. THERE ARE ALSO CRITICISMS OF THE ALLEGED UNCERTAINTY OF THE PRESENT LAW AND THE NUMBER OF 'TRIALS WITHIN TRIALS' THAT ARE PART OF THE PRESENT PROCEDURE. THE COMMISSION WILL LIKELY HAVE TO CONSIDER THE EXTENT EXTENT AND MODE OF DISCIPLINARY POWER THE COURTS WILL EXERCISE OVER POLICE, INCLUDING THE ISSUE OF EXCLUDING EVIDENCE PROVEN TO HAVE BEEN OBTAINED BY THE POLICE THROUGH UNFAIR OR ILLEGAL METHODS. THE ISSUES OF TAPERECORDING INTERROGATIONS, REQUIRING THE PRESENCE OF THE SUSPECT'S LAWYER AT INTERROGATIONS OR THE PRESENCE OF SOME THIRD PARTY SELECTED BY THE SUSPECT, AND INTERROGATION ONLY BEFORE A MAGISTRATE IN A FORMAL SETTING ARE LIKELY TO BE PROPOSED AS REMEDIES FOR POLICE INTERROGATION ABUSE. THE APPENDIXES DISCUSS THE ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF THE JUDGES' RULES BEARING UPON POLICE INTERROGATIONS, SOME CASES OF INTEREST, PROPOSALS FOR CHANGE, AND A POSSIBLE VALIDATION PROCEDURE. FOR OTHER MEMORANDA OF EVIDENCE TO THE COMMISSION, SEE NCJ 62983-86 AND 62988-92. (RCB)