The Norfolk Four: False Confessions a Miscarriage of Justice The Frontline documentary, The Confessions (2010), tells the story of the Norfolk Four; four innocent men who were ultimately convicted of the rape and murder of Michelle Bosko. As horrendous and appalling as Michelle Bosko’s murder was, that was not the most shocking point of the film. More astonishing is the fact that four innocent men were convicted of the crime with the help false confessions obtained by the police investigating the case. This despite the fact that police and prosecutors had physical evidence and testimony from the real murderer that pointed to the innocence of the Norfolk four. Although, the documentary primarily focuses on the coercive police interrogation …show more content…
The tactics used by the police while investigating the murder and rape of Michelle Bosko were coercive; the men claim they were interrogated for hours, threatened with the death penalty, and lied to in order to obtain the confessions. One of the men, Derek Tice, claims that while being questioned by the police he asked to speak to a lawyer only to have his request ignored a clear violation of his rights. Original suspect, Danial Williams, describes being questioned for eight hours by Detective Evans only to have Detective Ford brought in when Evans attempts to obtain a confession fail. With the use of such interrogating tactics each of the men confesses to the crime. When inaccuracies in their statements were found, such was the case in Danial Williams’ original confession when he claims that he beat Ms. Bosko with a shoe, the police interrogate him again nudging him towards a more possible explanation and …show more content…
Omar Abdul Ballard had admitted to the rape and murder of Michelle Bosko; his was the only semen found. Furthermore, Ballard tried to tell police that he alone had committed the crimes. Yet despite the physical evidence and Ballard’s statements, the courts decided to continue their cases against the other four men. Even the lawyers that should have been trying to defend the Norfolk Four did little to actually defend them against the charges and instead opted to try to get them a lighter sentence. Their own lawyers seemed unable to get over the fact that the men had confessed to the crime. Even with explanations of long interrogations, threats, and lies by the police these lawyers were unwilling to believe that innocent men would confess to such a heinous crime. Instead, they were urged to “cooperate” with the police and tell the “truth”. With this type of advice the men went up to the witness stand and committed perjury lying under oath and relaying their false confessions to the jury. The problem it seems is that the police and the courts were not interested in the truth or justice, they are looking for an easy way to close a case. They were looking for someone to blame and they were unwilling to admit that they were wrong when evidence seemed to show they had a made a
In December, 2011, two years after the unpleasant homicide of Wayne Boyce, the evidence collected for this particular crime suggested Prima Facie existing in the allegations made. The case then went to trial in the NSW Supreme Court of Australia. Where A 19 year old teenager referred by the initials of his name AH as he was a juvenile, pleaded guilty towards the manslaughter of Mr Wayne Boyce, 23 years of age.
Debated as one of the most misrepresented cases in American legal history, Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald still fights for innocence. Contrary to infallible evidence, prosecution intentionally withheld crucial information aiding MacDonald’s alibi. Such ratification included proof of an outside attack that would have played a major role in Jeffrey’s case.
This illustrates the refusal of the rights of victims and the inevitable denial of justice for society. The coronial inquest that was conducted in 2011, corrected some of the initial issues with the investigation. Before the inquest, vital DNA evidence was disposed of, as a result of human error, which meant that the likely suspect could not be identified. As a result of human error the inquest provided some form of justice for society but due to how late it was conducted the family did not receive justice
On Bloodsworth’s appeal he argued several points. First he argued that there was not sufficient evidence to tie Bloodsworth to the crime. The courts ruled that the ruling stand on the grounds that the witness evidence was enough for reasonable doubt that the c...
A woman was raped at Central Park and was found unconscious. She recovered quickly after the incident but could not recall what happened on that day. On the same day that woman was raped all five teenagers were there but were at the opposite direction of where the rape incident happened. They were brought in by the police to be questioned and were asked about the incident. The police were interrogating the teenagers and yelled at their faces because they were getting frustrated that they were not getting the answers that they wanted to hear from them. The teenagers were getting tired from being questioned for about two days on something they knew nothing about and wanted to just get out of the place. The police told them to say certain things and told them things that they wanted to hear, which led to the teenagers believing that if they said what the police told them to say then they could leave. They ended up confessing to raping the woman on video and paper and that led to their arrest. Though there were no actual evidence proving they were there at the scene, it did not matter because the police just wanted the confessions, which was their goal from the
To avoid being arrested for a Mann Act violation, both Victoria Price and Ruby Bates accused the Scottsboro Boys of raping them while aboard the train. Although both women accused the Scottsboro Boys, Ruby Bates recanted her story of the rape, and eventually, served as a witness for the defense. Victoria Price, however, refused to recant her story (“Trials of Scottsboro Boys”). Price’s testimony was inconsistent and evasive. She used ignorance and bad memory to avoid answering difficult questions.
``In criminal law, confession evidence is a prosecutor’s most potent weapon’’ (Kassin, 1997)—“the ‘queen of proofs’ in the law” (Brooks, 2000). Regardless of when in the legal process they occur, statements of confession often provide the most incriminating form of evidence and have been shown to significantly increase the rate of conviction. Legal scholars even argue that a defendant’s confession may be the sole piece of evidence considered during a trial and often guides jurors’ perception of the case (McCormick, 1972). The admission of a false confession can be the deciding point between a suspect’s freedom and their death sentence. To this end, research and analysis of the false confessions-filled Norfolk Four case reveals the drastic and controversial measures that the prosecuting team will take to provoke a confession, be it true or false.
This is when I had known that the criminal justice system had mad various errors with this case. For instance the only evidence that the police had, had at the time was a description of the suspect, from the victim’s husband whose adrenaline level was very high. In my opinion when a traumatic thing just occurred I think it would of been best to of asked the eye witness what the suspect had looked like multiple times and giving a good length time period between when I asked. As well as when they arrested Brenton, the first mistake I noticed was how they claimed they found/captured the murderer of Mary Ann Stevens right away. The second mistake I noticed was how they asked the victim’s husband if Brenton Butler was the one who had pulled the trigger killing his wife. Now usually from what I’ve seen when police want someone to be identified the police do a couple things: 1. Capture Multiple people and 2. Have them stand in a police station while the witness picks out who he/she suspects was the suspect. Now the police did not do that, they captured one suspect and had him sit in the back of a cop car while the eye witness, which in this case was Mary Ann’s husband, judge from a distance to see if that was the boy who killed his wife. Additionally when they made that arrest my immediate question was why did the forensic team in which ever unit test Brenton Butler hands and clothes for gun
On June 20, 2001 a woman by the name of Andrea Yates, stunned the whole country with one of the most bizarre acts of violence that a parents could ever do to their own children. She called her husband at work and told him “I did it” confused by what was going on, he rush home only to find his house filled with officers of the law. The husband asked, “What is going on?”, and only to found out that his wife had drowned all five of their children.
There are many ways to decide what makes a man guilty. In an ethical sense, there is more to guilt than just committing the crime. In Charles Brockden Browns’ Wieland, the reader is presented with a moral dilemma: is Theodore Wieland guilty of murdering his wife and children, even though he claims that the command came from God, or is Carwin guilty because of his history of using persuasive voices, even though his role in the Wieland family’s murder is questionable? To answer these questions, one must consider what determines guilt, such as responsibility, motives, consequences, and the act itself. No matter which view is taken on what determines a man’s guilt, it can be concluded that Wieland bears the fault in the murder of Catharine Wieland and her children.
Now, it takes a lot of courage for an investigator to stand up and admit a wrongful conviction, especially in a case that he helped to convict. That brings me to think agree with the statement of Chief Justice William H. Rehmquist “the justice system has not yet learned to confront the fact that, even when there are no easily identifiable misstep, it can produce an unjust outcome.” (Clifford 4) It is because of this reason, that manyinnocent people end up in jail. Despite the efforts to get them out, many of them are denied. It took nine years for federal agents to even consider looking into the Edward Garry conviction case. In addition, it took another three years for Garry’s lawyer to get a post-conviction motion, which was denied by a Bronx judge, saying that the new evidence wasn’t credible. And still, Garry has yet to be absolved for this crime that he did not commit despite witnesses testifying on his behalf. This is a really depressing case because of the fact that Garry has become broken. “Garry gives the impression of a man who has been inside literally and figuratively for far too long.” Twenty one years of his innocent life that he may never get back. All because this justice system has failed him as a
"The West Memphis Three Trial: Who was the real killer or killers?." The West Memphis Three
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.
On August 20th, 1989 Lyle and Erik Menendez killed their parents inside their Beverly Hills home with fifteen shot gun blasts after years of alleged “sexual, psychological, and corporal abuse” (Berns 25). According to the author of “Murder as Therapy”, “The defense has done a marvelous job of assisting the brothers in playing up their victim roles” (Goldman 1). Because there was so much evidence piled up against the brothers, the defense team was forced to play to the jurors’ emotions if they wanted a chance at an acquittal. Prosecutor Pamela Bozanich was forced to concede that “Jose and Kitty obviously had terrific flaws-most people do in the course of reminding jurors that the case was about murder, not child abuse” (Adler 103). Bozanich “cast the details of abuse as cool, calculated lies” (Smolowe 48)...
"Know the Cases." Innocence Project. Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, n.d. Web. 1 Mar 2011. .