What is the problem? What is the problem with receiving and using torture-tainted information, and sharing information with States that torture? Using the fruits of torture encourages it, and gives torture an ill-deserved credibility. Accepting, using, and placing value on such intelligence ‘legitimises’ the torture used for its collection. It is hypocritical of States to condemn torture committed by others while accepting its products. In accepting torture-tainted information, States can become customers to torture, and may implicitly legitimise and encourage its use. By encouraging torture, agencies create a market where States that torture are rewarded for their trade. Torture-tainted information is inherently unreliable. The pain and suffering caused to a victim destroys their will and causes them to say anything to end the pain. This pain and suffering is long-lasting, and likely causes the suffering to continue long after the torture itself ends. Using torture-tainted information which has a high risk of unreliability is contrary to the interests of police, security and intelligence agencies, who require accurate information in order to operate effectively. Relying on tainted information wastes resources. Torture necessarily generates false positives, as interrogators only accept information they want to hear. On the basis of unreliable information obtained by torture, investigations are diverted and more information is sought, again repeating the cycle of torture. Such tactics wastes time and diverts attention from proper investigations and real threats. 17