3.5 Interviews + False Confessions

Question 1

goals + assumptions of police interrogation

Answer 1

• gain info that will further investigation
• obtain confession
• some assume suspects are guilty non-cooperative, forced to talk

Question 2

history of coercive measures in police investigations

Answer 2

• mid-1900s, whipping suspects for confession
• 1980s: stun guns = confession
• recently: psychological manipulation, deceit

Question 3

the americans’ bible of interrogation

Answer 3

Inbau, Reid + Buckley 1986, ‘criminal interrogations + confessions’
involves 3 steps:
1. gather evidence
2. conduct as non-accusatorial interview to assess deception/guilt
3. conduct an accusatorial confession (if needed)

Question 4

Inbau, Reid, Buckley method 3

Answer 4

1. positive confrontation (explain evidence led them here, give opportunity to explain)
2. theme development (shift blame, justify crime)
3. handling denials
4. overcoming objections
5. retaining suspect attention
6. handling suspect’s mood
7. creating opportunity to confess
8. oral confession
9. converting oral confession into written

Question 5

Reid setting

Answer 5

suspect has as little control as possible
small bare room, suspect no control of lighting, heating, invasion of suspect’s physical space, one-way mirror

Question 6

positive confrontation

Answer 6

• direct presentation of real/fictional evidence + suspect’s involvement in crime
• suspects’ bahavioural cues noted
• repetition of accusation

Question 7

theme development

Answer 7

psychological themes developed to justify crime
- differs depending on suspect’s emotional state
emotional: MINIMISATION: good cop, rapport, minimise severity, ‘anyone in your position would have done the same’
non-emotional: MAXIMISATION: bad cop, maximise stakes, accusatory, create false evidence

Question 8

handling denials

Answer 8

stopping suspect repetition or elaboration of denials
- more frequently a suspect repeats a lie, harder it is for interrogator to persuade suspects to tell the truth
- innocent suspects not allow denials to be cut off, guilty suspects will

Question 9

overcoming objections

Answer 9

• ove4rcome objections by showing understanding + returning to conversation theme
• ‘that’s true that you don’t own a gun, BUT…’

Question 10

retaining suspect attention

Answer 10

• interrogator moves physically closer, leans in, maintains eye contact

Question 11

handling suspect’s passive mood

Answer 11

• interrogator focuses suspect on reasons for crime
• interrogator sympathetic, urge suspect tell truth, remorseful mood

Question 12

create opportunity to confess

Answer 12

suspects given opportunity to provide explanation or excuse for the crime
* ‘was it your idea or did someone talk you into it?’ – seems like one is better, but BOTH admissions of guilt

Question 13

oral confession

Answer 13

• development of initial confession, discloses circumstances, motives, details of crime
• questions brief, clear, non-emotionally charged, responses brief

Question 14

converting oral confession into written one

Answer 14

• important - suspects sometimes deny making oral confession

Question 15

social-psychological explanation of 9-step approach

Answer 15

• explained in terms of attitude change
• minimisation emphasises +ve aspects of admitting guilt
• maximisation emphasises -ve aspects of making confession
• together techniques used create more positive attitude towards confession

Question 16

nine concerns w/ 9-step approach

Answer 16

1. officers enter w/ inappropriate biases that suspect is guilty –> only focusing on getting confession, not information
2. trickery, deceit unlawful in several countries - UNETHICAL
3. pressing suspects to confess might have opposite (boomerang) effect - resentment towards police
4. guilty suspect might catch onto bluffing, not believe anything being told
5. police may think it’s ok to bluff in other circumstances
6. vulnerable suspects may get PTSD
7. brief responses = not give whole accurate story
8. assumes police officers can accurately detect deception (little evidence for this), inappropriate endorsed indicators of deception
9. technique may get FALSE CONFESSIONS

Question 17

false confession

Answer 17

when someone confesses to a crime they didn’t commit or exaggerates their involvement in a crime they did commit

Question 18

frequency of false confessions

Answer 18

• 27% prisoners later exonerated by DNA evidence had given false confessions
• 95% of all new inmates to prisons in iceland were interviewed over a 12 month period
• 12% claimed to have made false confession during police interview; 78% convicted of this
• slightly >1/2 said made false confession to escape police interrogation, just under half to protect another

Question 19

voluntary false confessions

Answer 19

• NO PROMPT FROM POLICE
  why?
• desire for notoriety, inability to distinguish fact from fantasy, attempt to protect real offender, need to be punished
• LINDBERGH BABY 200 PEOPLE CONFESSED

Question 20

coerced-compliant false confessions

Answer 20

RESPONSE TO DESIRE TO ESCAPE FURTHER INTERROGATION, gain a promised reward, or escape a threatened punishment
* confessor KNOWS they did not commit the crime

Question 21

coerced-internalised false confession

Answer 21

• results from highly suggestive interrogations
• confessor comes to belive they DID commit the crime, often starts a coerced-compliant
• some people, esp those w/ learning disabilities, more susceptible to this (+ history of substance abuse)
• paul inhram??