Anatomy of a False Confession
Anatomy of a False Confession
Depending on what study is read, the incidence of false confession is less than 35 per year, up to 600 per year. That is a significant variance in range, but no matter how it is evaluated or what numbers are calculated, the fact remains that false confessions are a reality. Why would an innocent person confess to a crime that she did not commit? Are personal factors, such as age, education, and mental state, the primary reason for a suspect to confess? Are law enforcement officers and their interrogation techniques to blame for eliciting false confessions? Regardless of the stimuli that lead to false confessions, society and the justice system need to find a solution to prevent the subsequent aftermath. In the adversarial justice system, when the offender admits to the criminal act, there is no further controversy and the case promptly proceeds to sentencing. Physical evidence and victim or witness statements may often be overlooked and not considered. The confession is considered unequivocal evidence of guilt and a conviction is ensured. Indeed, the interrogation process ' sole purpose is to obtain a confession. Zimbardo (1967) estimated that "of those criminal cases that are solved, more than 80% are solved by a confession." (Conti, 1999) Without the confession, convictions may be reduced significantly. So why does a person falsely confess to a crime if the likelihood of a conviction is eminent? A false confession to any crime is self-destructive and counterintuitive. The mental state of the suspect can give explanation to a false confession. If a person is inebriated and is questioned before she is sober, that may lead to easier manipulation by the police. A suspect under the influence of alcohol or drugs may not remember all the events leading up to her arrest. This mental state allows police officers to give misleading information, which may imply that the suspect did commit the crime and does not remember
Depending on what study is read, the incidence of false confession is less than 35 per year, up to 600 per year. That is a significant variance in range, but no matter how it is evaluated or what numbers are calculated, the fact remains that false confessions are a reality. Why would an innocent person confess to a crime that she did not commit? Are personal factors, such as age, education, and mental state, the primary reason for a suspect to confess? Are law enforcement officers and their interrogation techniques to blame for eliciting false confessions? Regardless of the stimuli that lead to false confessions, society and the justice system need to find a solution to prevent the subsequent aftermath. In the adversarial justice system, when the offender admits to the criminal act, there is no further controversy and the case promptly proceeds to sentencing. Physical evidence and victim or witness statements may often be overlooked and not considered. The confession is considered unequivocal evidence of guilt and a conviction is ensured. Indeed, the interrogation process ' sole purpose is to obtain a confession. Zimbardo (1967) estimated that "of those criminal cases that are solved, more than 80% are solved by a confession." (Conti, 1999) Without the confession, convictions may be reduced significantly. So why does a person falsely confess to a crime if the likelihood of a conviction is eminent? A false confession to any crime is self-destructive and counterintuitive. The mental state of the suspect can give explanation to a false confession. If a person is inebriated and is questioned before she is sober, that may lead to easier manipulation by the police. A suspect under the influence of alcohol or drugs may not remember all the events leading up to her arrest. This mental state allows police officers to give misleading information, which may imply that the suspect did commit the crime and does not remember
References: Cassell, P.G. (1999, Spring). The guilty and the "innocent": An examination of alleged Cases of wrongful conviction from false confessions And Public Policy. Retrieved August 21, 2005, from http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/guilt.htm Conti, R.P. (1999). The psychology of false confessions. Journal of Credibility Assessment and Witness Psychology Vol DeMarzo, W.J., & DeVise, D. (2002, December 22). Spotlight on false confessions Zealous grilling by police tainted 38 murder cases August 19, 2005, from www.truthinjustice.org/Spotlight-False-Confessions.htm. Innocence Project. (2001). False confessions. Retrieved August 20, 2005, from http://www.innocenceproject.org/causes/falseconfessions.php. Irsay, S. (2002, November 19). Fear factor: how far can police go to get a confession? Retrieved August 21, 2005, from http://news.findlaw.com. Kassin, S.M., & Norwick, R.J. (2004, April). Why people waive their Miranda rights: The power of innocence Kassin, S.M., & McNall, K. (1991). Police interrogations and confessions: Communicating promises and threats by pragmatic implication Kassin, S.M., & Sukel, H. (1997). Coerced confessions and the jury: an experimental Test of the "harmless error" rule Kassin, S. (2004, April 26). Videotape police interrogations. Retrieved August 21, 2005, From The Boston Globe. Meissner, C.A., & Kassin, S.M. (2002, October). "He 's guilty!": investigator bias in Judgments of truth and deception Osterburg, J.W., & Ward, R.H. (2004). Criminal Investigation: A Method For Reconstructing The Past Perina, A. (2004, March 1). "I confess." Psychology Today Vol. 36, Issue 2.