Week Five - Confession Evidence Flashcards
Why are confessions powerful? 5
- Almost impossible to retract
- Subject to less scrutiny than other types of evidence
- Perceived as more credible than other types of evidence
- Can be used to convict in the absence of any other incriminating evidence
- Can override exculpatory evidence
Why are false confessions counter-intuitive?
False confessions run counter to our fundamental beliefs about human behaviour
“The myth of psychological interrogation” (Leo, 2008)
A person of sound mind will not confess to a crime they did not commit unless tortured
Mr Big Technique for eliciting confessions?
Undercover officers create fictional criminal gangs and offer suspect’s membership in exchange for a confession
• Significant inducement to confess
• Often a tactic of last resort
• Legal, moral and ethical concerns
The Reid Technique?
Nine-step interrogation technique for interrogating suspects: – Used when suspect is assumed guilty • i.e., to establish guilt – Isolation of suspect - effectively manipulates people - effectively elicits confessions
9 steps of the Reid Technique?
- Direct confrontation
- Theme development
- Denials
- Objections
- Reduce distance, maintain attention
- Excuses, understanding, and sympathy
- Lesser of two evils
- Verbal confession
- Written confession
Two components of Reid technique?
Minimisation
• Expectation of leniency
Maximisation
• Threat of greater punishment
Shown to increase false confession
- Direct confrontation
• “We know you were involved”
• “In this folder I have all the evidence I need”
• “Our investigation shows that you are without a
doubt guilty of this crime”
- Theme development
The talking stage
• Theme development (cf. confrontation)
• about why not if they did it
Blame displacement “It was an accident. We can tell that you didn’t mean to hit the officer by the trajectory of the bullet” (minimisation)
- Denials
- Everyone denies guilt initially
- Innocent people will step up their denials
- Denials must be stopped before they can be completed (“I didn’t do it” not good on the tape)
Cessation or weakening of denials indicates “progress”
- Objections
- Suspect gives reasons why the accusation is false
- Interrogator agrees with the statement (“it would be awful if the accusation was false”)
- Positive discussion about the objection
- Negative discussion about the objection
- Reminder that the crime wasn’t their fault
- Proper handling of objections helps overcome the subject’s defenses.
- Reduce distance, maintain attention
- Suspect becomes withdrawn, tense, or confused
- Themes only work is suspect if listening
- Reduce physical distance
- Physical gestures to show sincerity and understanding
- Excuses, understanding, and sympathy
- Suspect may cry and appear defeated
- Maintain close physical proximity
- Keep repeating theme elements
- Introduce the idea of the alternative question
“did you steal that money to buy drugs and booze, or was it to help your family?”
- Lesser of two evils
- Suspect can choose from two versions of the crime (“Acceptable” vs. “Unacceptable”)
- The interrogator states their belief that the crime was committed for the “good” reason
- Verbal confession
• “We want to hear it from you so we can document it”
• Once alternative is accepted, interrogator confirms belief in the suspect’s story, “I knew all
along that was what happened”
• The suspect is encouraged to tell their story (again) using open ended questions
• Obtain information only the guilty party would know (cf. contamination)
