How much should a historian trust a confession extracted by torture?

A confession extracted by torture is always very tricky as to whether it should be trusted or not, so any historian should take this kind of confessions with reserve because it is always a 50-50 chance. Some of these confessions are true, but only in cases were the tortured one really knows the information and is not willing to give up on his/hers life by keeping it as a secret. On the other hand there a lots of confessions extracted by torture that don't correspond with the truth, but the tortured person admitted/told something that is not something he/she has done or really knows because they wanted to save their life (though very often it didn't really helped but was just used against them and as a propaganda).

answer; ///hinduism///buddhism//christianity//judaism and

china unilaterally claims the entire south china sea as sovereign territory, then builds artificial islands to bolster its claim. it suddenly activates an air defense identification zone over the east china sea, and threatens to down any aircraft that does not report its position. it builds roads into indian territory, then redraws the maps to show that it is actually chinese territory. the people's republic under president xi jinping is quickly becoming the bully of asia.