Each post has to demonstrate a meaningful synthesis of the
Each post has to demonstrate a meaningful synthesis of the material posted (typically a research article) and the corresponding chapter assigned for that week. Keep in mind that your discussion forum postings will likely be seen by other members of the course. Care should be taken when determining what to post.
Specifically, your posts should be critically reflecting on each week’s postings, relate it back to the week’s chapter, and will be graded based on your ability to connect the two in a thoughtful and coherent way. You can earn up to 3 points per post, please refer to the attached rubric when submitting your post to see the criteria upon which you will be graded. Keep in mind that these posts are meant to flow as a dialogue between all students enrolled in the class. It is very important that you reference your readings in these weekly posts as just making a post does not guarantee points. Your grade for each post will be based on the quality of your response. Hence, giving a blanket “I agree/I disagree” answers or opinions that anyone could write without having an in-depth understanding of the material assigned will not be accepted. It is also important that you read the week’s posting in its entirety. It is highly recommended to read previous posts so that you do not write similar ideas. Again, part of the grading criteria includes the student’s ability to add value to the ongoing discussion by connecting the material with information from the book and possibly outside sources. Postings should be no longer than two paragraphs and should show your understanding of the week's readings.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/the-confessions/interviews/michael-fasanaro.html
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/the-confessions/etc/introduction.html
Interrogations and Confessions
Chapter 3: Interrogations and Confessions
In this chapter
The Power of a Confession
The Evolution of Interrogation Techniques
Inside the Modern Interrogation Room
The Problem of False Confessions
Should Interrogators Be Allowed to Lie?
Potential Solutions to the Problem of False Confessions
Interrogation
From interview to interrogation
Presumption of guilt has been made
Goal of questioning suspects = to elicit confession
Police are relatively good at eliciting confessions
39%-48% of suspects make full confession
13%-16% make damaging statements
Involves basic processes studied by psychologists in many contexts:
Compliance
Persuasion
Obedience to authority
Decision-making under stressful conditions
Why do we need/rely on confessions?
Provide important leads and access to additional evidence
Save time and money
Trials are avoided (often result in guilty pleas)
Less time spent searching for and testing other evidence
Almost “guaranteed” conviction
Puts defendants on a “fast track” to conviction
Extremely powerful/persuasive piece of evidence
Power of Confession
“Triers of fact accord confession such heavy weight in their determinations that the introduction of a confession makes the other aspects of a trial in court superfluous, and the real trial, for all practical purposes, occurs when the confession is obtained.”
– (Colorado v. Connelly, 1986, 9. 173)
“[Confession evidence is] inherently prejudicial and highly damaging to a defendant, even if it is the product of coercive interrogation, even if it is supported by no other evidence, and even if it is ultimately proven false beyond any reasonable doubt.”
– (Drizin & Leo, 2004, p. 959)
The Power of Confession
Goal of questioning is to elicit confession
39–48% of suspects make full confessions
13–16% of suspects make damaging statements or partial admissions
68% of police-interrogated suspects make self-incriminating statements
Surpassing power of confessions (Colorado v. Connelly, 1986)
6
Why are confessions so powerful?
Fundamental attribution bias/error
Tendency to attribute other people’s behavior to dispositional causes (traits, personality) and underestimate the power of the situation
Confessions are statements against the self
“I’d never do that”
Inadmissible Confessions
Since 1961 – confessions are ruled inadmissible if elicited using:
Physical force
Sleep or food deprivation
Prolonged isolation
Explicit threats of violence
Clear promises of leniency or immunity
5th Amendment
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be paid twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken to public use, without just compensation.”
5th Amendment
Brown v. Mississippi (1936)
3 young black men were accused of murder
Were beaten and threatened with death into giving confessions
Trial court convicted and sentenced to death; upheld on appeal
Supreme Court ruled Constitution prohibits use of coerced confessions as evidence
Voluntariness test
Confessions inadmissible unless made willingly
Miranda Rights (1966)
Miranda v. Arizona (1966)
Arose from cases in which suspects were taken into custody and interrogated w/o being informed of
their constitutional rights, after which they confessed
Supreme Court ruled that before people in police custody may be questioned, they must be informed of their constitutional rights Miranda warnings were established
Interrogations are coercive by nature – need not have physical abuse or threats to be coercive
Miranda Warning
You have the right to remain silent.
Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.
You have the right to talk to a lawyer and to have him present with you while you are being questioned.
If you cannot afford to hire a lawyer, one will be appointed to represent you before any questioning if you wish.
You can decide at any time to exercise these rights and not answer any questions or make any statements.
Waiver
Do you understand each of these rights I have explained to you?
Having these rights in mind, do you wish to talk to us now?
If a suspect in police custody has not been Mirandized, any subsequent confessions can be excluded at trial.
What does “in custody” mean?
Depends on the circumstances surrounding the police, suspect, and questioning
Informed: that it is voluntary?
Freedom of Movement: free to move?
Consent: Who initiated contact, talk willingly?
Accusatory: The degree to which the suspect is confronted with evidence of his guilt.
Oppressive: Whether the police dominated the atmosphere of the questioning.
Evolution of Interrogation Techniques
Prior to 1930
Use of direct physical violence
1931
Report on Lawlessness and Law Enforcement led to covert abuse that did not leave marks, including such things as deprivation, isolation, and intimidation
Since 1961
Series of legal decisions pushed police from covert physical to more psychological coercion forms
Culombe v. Connecticut, 1961; Davis v. North Carolina, 1966; Reck v. Pate, 1961; Townsend v. Sain, 1963
Miranda Warnings
~80% of suspects waive rights and submit to interrogation
Why?
Innocent more likely to waive rights than guilty
Why?
Limitations to Miranda
Applies only to custodial interrogations
If not in custody, no warning needed
If don’t want to question suspect, no warrant needed
Applies only to testimonial evidence
Statements made by the suspect
Suspect needs to invoke right (not remain silent)
If not, cops can interrogate
YOU IMUST SAY, FOIR EXA MP1 LE:
I wish to remain
silent..
I have nothing to say..
I do not want to answer any questions.
Inside the Modern Interrogation Room
Modern interrogation is primarily psychological (e.g., good cop/bad cop approach)
Police receive training and are familiar with interrogation manuals and techniques
Most widely used reference by Inbau and colleagues (2013) offers detailed advice on every aspect of interrogation processes
Central to the process is the Reid technique
Let’s take a closer look.
Inbau and colleagues (2013) offer detailed advice on every aspect of the interrogation process including how to set up the interrogation room, what questions to ask, appropriate nonverbal behavior for the interrogator, how to respond to questions or denials by a suspect, and how to handle passive or defiant suspects. Even peripheral details such as the type of chairs in the interrogation room receive serious attention.
18
Inside the Modern Interrogation Room
Mostly psychological
Example: Good Cop – Bad Cop approach
sympathizing and disappointment vs. disgust and anger
Reid Technique
Trained over 500,000 individuals (in LE)
9 step technique
Based on 4 influence strategies:
Loss of control
Social isolation
Certainty of guilt
Minimization of culpability
Reid Technique: 9 Steps
Direct confrontation
Offer excuses
Cut off denials
Overcome denials
Hold suspects attention
(by appearing sincere and understanding)
After signs of giving up, move towards admission of guilt
Offer alternative themes
Elicit full confession
Document confession
(obtain signed confession statement)
Innocence, Guilt, Interrogation Style, and Waiver of Miranda Rights
Participants who were guilty or innocent of a mock crime (stealing $100) were confronted by a neutral, sympathetic, or hostile “Detective McCarthy,” who asked if they would waive their rights and talk
Only 36% of guilty versus 81% of those that had nothing to hide or fear (Kassin & Norwick, 2004)
Innocents are especially at risk for waiving rights to counsel and silence that were established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Miranda, believing they have nothing to hide. Yet longer exposure to questioning leaves them at greater risk for a false confession.
21
Core Principles of Social Influence
Cialdini proposed six principles that underlie influence of others
Are any of these principles used by police to elicit incriminating admissions from suspects?
If so, how?
1. Loss of Control
Control pace and direction of conversation and the physical environment
Small sparse room
Interrogator is in control
“Tightly controlled, psychologically disorienting situation in which the normal rules of social interaction no longer apply.”
2. Social Isolation
Suspects always interrogated alone
Deprive of emotional support
Minimize contradictions of interrogator’s statements
Suspect has no other way to find out the strength of their case – have to take interrogator’s word
“Carefully constructed, somewhat surreal environment.”
3. Certainty of Guilt
Direct accusation = Step 1
Interrogator challenges, cuts off, dismisses all denials
Evidence ploys
You did it!
Evidence Ploys
(part of “Certainty of Guilt”)
Interrogators mention evidence that clearly establishes the suspect’s guilt
Can be real or fabricated
Can claim to have evidence when they do not and that real or false evidence implicates the suspect when it does not
Creative examples:
“humidity test”/father awoken from coma
Satellite photos showing defendant leaving the house
“neutron-proton-negligence-intelligence test” for evidence of firing a gun
Last image imprinted on retina of murder victim
4. Minimization of Culpability
Offer face saving justifications or excuses for the crime
Minimize the seriousness of the crime/sympathize with the suspect
Implies leniency (but don’t say it explicitly!)
Shift blame to another person or set of circumstances
Redefine the act itself
Suspects are given two choices…but both involve admitting guilt
Isolation and Confrontation
Place suspect in small, bare interrogation room
Confident accusation of guilt; many hours without sleep
Isolation creates a desire to escape
Maximization – Tactics intended to convey suspect’s guilt and consequences of not confessing
Increase anxiety associated with denying
Threaten suspect; exaggerate seriousness of crime; interrupt attempts to deny; lie or bluff about evidence
Maximization makes suspect feel hopeless
Minimization – Tactics designed to justify and/or normalize the crime and reduce its seriousness
Decrease anxiety associated with confessing
Offer sympathy; blame the victim; normalize the crime; imply leniency; praise suspect; use ‘alternative question’
Minimization implies leniency and provides an escape
Using Interrogation Tactics to Reshape the Decision About Whether to Confess
(a) This naive model of suspect decision making suggests that the strongly negative potential consequences of confessing should prevent suspects from confessing. That is, unless a suspect is mentally impaired or mentally ill or physically abused, there is no immediately obvious, easy-to-understand explanation for a false confession.
(b) This interrogation-induced model of suspect decision making suggests that the option of continuing to deny involvement in the crime seems to make things worse. That is, the interrogation tactics described in this chapter are designed to reshape suspects’ understanding of their decision options and the consequences that follow from those options.
Thus, the alternative of admitting involvement (for a justifiable reason) may sometimes appear to be the only viable course of action. Indeed, in several proven false-confession cases, people have made false confessions to end the interrogation and escape from the interrogation room, believing that they would be able to straighten out everything later. (Information from Costanzo et al., 2016.)
29
The Truth about False Confessions
False Confessions
Primarily the result of vulnerable people being subjected to powerful influences tactics deployed in the interrogation room
Ways to be vulnerable:
Young; inexperienced; naïve; highly suggestible; under influence; submissive to authority; low intelligence; mentally ill; sleep deprived; highly compliant;
Influence tactics
Lying, intimidation, deception, fatigue, abuse, etc.
Occur most often in murder cases (80% of proven false confessions)
Known cases of false confession only represent the tip of the iceberg
May be related to mindset of innocent suspects
False Confessions
Are caused most by police interrogations, especially when adult techniques used on juveniles
May be related to tendency to give priority to short-term goals of escaping interrogation room and appeasing interrogation (short-sightedness)
May be related to mindset of innocent suspects
What if the confession is coerced?
Judges can rule confession inadmissible (rare) or leave it to jurors to decide voluntariness asking that they disregard coerced statements
Jurors fail to discount coerced confessions
Kassin & Sukel (1997)
Mock jurors read trial transcripts involving either:
No confession
Low pressure confession – confessed immediately
High pressure confession – suspect was described as being in pain, handcuffed, and police waving gun
Results: Mock jurors recognized high pressure confession as coerced and said that they disregarded it when rendering verdicts. But did they really?
Drizin & Leo (2004)
Examined 125 prove false confession cases (DNA did not match the person who confessed)
Findings:
False confessors who later pled “not guilty” were convicted 81% of the time (despite exculpatory DNA evidence)
Jurors were not able to recognize false confessions
False Confessions: Do they exist?
Yes, they exist, and people are wrongfully convicted of serious crimes due to them
False confessions were a contributing factor in approximately 30% of DNA exonerations
Types of False Confessions
Four types of false confessions across two dimensions
Dimensions
Instrumental or internalized
Voluntary or coerced
Types of False Confessions
Cases can involve all four types of confessions
Instrumental–coerced false confessions: Suspects confess to crimes not committed; most common false confession in criminal cases
Instrumental–voluntary false confessions: Suspects provide false confession as means to end
Types of False Confessions
Internalized–coerced false confessions
Suspect becomes convinced of own guilt after long, intense interrogation; vivid false memories may be created
Internalized–voluntary false confessions
Suspect suffers from delusion and confesses with little or no pressure from interrogation
Four Types of False Confessions and Some Possible Reasons for Them
| Coerced | Voluntary | |
| Instrumental | Instrumental–coerced | Instrumental–voluntary |
| Possible reason: end interrogation | Possible reason: protect someone else or gain notoriety | |
| Internalized | Internalized–coerced | Internalized–voluntary |
| Possible reason: persuaded of own guilt | Possible reason: mental illness |
Hot Topic: Ethics, the APA, and the Use of Torture as an Interrogation Device
Ethical and moral codes of conduct, international and national treaties and laws violated
Little research on effectiveness of torture, but irrefutable evidence that less coercive interrogation can produce verifiable false confessions
Actions based on false information from torture may have dire consequences, especially in military actions
International and national treaties and laws (e.g., Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948; the Geneva Convention, 1949; the United States Congress
Joint Resolution Opposing Torture, 1984; and United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment, 1984, 1987).
41
Should interrogators be allowed to lie?
United States
Interrogators allowed to use false evidence ploys
England and Wales – Police And Criminal Evidence Act (PACE)
Makes it illegal to lie
Witness must be present for questioning of vulnerable suspects
Must be audio-recorded
Intimidation is not permitted
Can police still elicit confessions?
Admissions of guilt have not declined
Modern Interrogation
Primary concern about this approach…
May be good at eliciting true confessions from guilty suspects, but
Puts innocent suspects at risk of falsely confessing
Evolution of Interrogation Techniques
Techniques have changed over the years but underlying structure of interrogation has remained the same
Denials punished
Admissions rewarded
Future outcomes minimized
Interrogation Methods: Information Gathering Versus Accusatorial
| Information-Gathering Methods | Accusatorial Methods |
| Establish rapport | Establish control |
| Use direct, positive confrontation | Use psychological manipulation |
| Employ open-ended, exploratory questions | Employ closed-ended, confirmatory questions |
| Primary goal is to elicit information | Primary goal is to obtain a confession |
| Focus on cognitive cues to deception | Focus on anxiety cues to deception |
Both information-gathering and accusatorial methods increased likelihood of obtaining true confession.
Accusatorial methods also increase likelihood of obtaining false confession.
The benefit of reducing the number of false confessions without reducing the number of true confessions has led many researchers to advocate the use of information-gathering interrogation techniques.
45
Alternative Approaches to Interrogation: HUMINT, SUE, and PEACE
Information-gathering approaches especially useful in context of human intelligence (HUMINT) interrogations often used in military
Uncover information; terrorists and other national security threats
May have challenges related to cultural differences
Strategically withholding or revealing known evidence in ways that expose contradictions between a suspect’s claims and the available facts (strategic use of evidence [SUE])
Suggests specific tactics for deciding how and when to disclose evidence about crime
46
Alternative Approaches to Interrogation: HUMINT, SUE, and PEACE
Useful information-gathering approach in criminal justice system (PEACE)
Five stage interrogation process: Preparation/planning, Engage/explain, Account, Closure, Evaluation
Recommendations for Reform
Electronic recording of all interrogations
Impose time limits
Protections for vulnerable suspects (children)
Expert testimony
Reform of interrogation practices
Ban or limit the use of certain techniques
Potential Solutions to Problems of False Confessions
Video recording of interrogations
Creates permanent, objective, reviewable record; emotional tone and nonverbal information
Improves interrogation methods and data archive
Video recording can be manipulated, especially if interrogation is partially recorded
Recording admission and not interrogation
Only showing segments at trial
Manipulating camera angle; not equal-focus camera perspective
49
Safeguards Against False Confession
Video Recording
Creates permanen
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
All Rights Reserved Terms and Conditions
College pals.com Privacy Policy 2010-2018