This book consists of many different arguments as to what flaws exist in the “Mr. Big” undercover operation, and how one’s confession to a crime when targeted through this operation could not be reliable. I have chosen to discuss two specific arguments which I feel are the most significant ones. Firstly the operation only takes place after a trial has occurred and due to lack of substantial evidence the accused is let go, and only then is it that an undercover officer begins to lure him into this so called criminal organization, they build his/her trust by giving him/her abundant of money, and once trust is gained they introduce him/her to the “Mr. Big” who will solve all his/her problems and all he has to is confess the crime to him. Given the level of inducement there is no reason for him to reject committing the crime, may it be false or not. The justice in the Mentuck case worded it perfectly as he said “ the police must be aware that as the level of inducement increases, the risk of receiving a confession to an offence which one did not commit increases, and the reliability of the confession diminishes correspondingly… (page 15, Mr. Big). …show more content…
Big to get him out of the mess he’s weather his confession was true or not he confessed in such circumstances and therefore making his confession
The more notorious the case, the greater the number of prospective informant. They rush to testify like vultures to rotting flesh or sharks to blood. The are smooth and convincing liars(George Carlin, p.1).” Jailhouse informants are a major factor to convicting innocent people. Using informants makes an unjust and unfair trial. The Thomas Sophonow case used jailhouse informants to convict Sophonow of a crime he did not commit. Thomas was convicted of murdering Barbara Stoppel at the Ideal Donut Shop in Winnipeg, Manitoba. Thomas has a highly suspect and was brought to jail. Three informants claimed that Thomas has confessed to them that he had murdered Barbara. All three informants lied on the stands. Mr. McQuade who was one of the informants testified under duress. Two police officers had told him that if he did not testify against Thomas voluntarily, the Crown was going to exposed him of being an informant. Another informant was Mr. Cheng who was charged with 26 counts of fraud. He hoped if he testified against Thomas his charges were to be dropped and luckily for him they were. The last informant was Mr. Martin who was described as “a prime example of convincing mendacity of jailhouse informants. He seems to have heard more confessions than many dedicated priest(Sarah Harland-Logan, p.1).” There were other 11 informants who were eager to give false testimony
Because police investigators are usually under pressure to arrest criminals and safeguard the community, they often make mistakes. Sometimes, detectives become convinced of a suspect 's guilt because of their criminal history or weak speculations. Once they are convinced, they are less likely to consider alternative possibilities. They overlook some important exculpatory evidence, make weak speculations and look only for links that connect a suspect to a crime, especially if the suspect has a previous criminal record. Picking Cotton provides an understanding of some common errors of the police investigation process. During Ronald Cottons interrogation, the detectives did not bother to record the conversation “But I noticed he wasn 't recording the conversation, so I felt that he could be writing anything down”(79) unlike they did for Jennifer. They had already labelled Ronald Cotton as the perpetrator and they told him during the interrogation “Cotton, Jennifer Thompson already identified you. We know it was you”(82). Jenifer Thompson 's testimony along with Ronald Cotton 's past criminal records gave the detectives more reason to believe Ronald committed the crime. Ronald Cotton stated “ This cop Sully, though, he had already decided I was guilty.”(84). Many investigative process have shortcomings and are breached because the officials in charge make
International entertainment industries have profited billions directly from motion pictures concerning entrapment. The basic premise is alike throughout each title, an alpha and occasionally rogue officer of the law accepts an undercover mission to detain a notorious criminal of the underworld, though enjoyable the legality and morality of the protagonist’s actions are rarely examined. Entrapment is the term used to describe cases of which police induce or facilitate a person to commit a crime he or her are unlikely to commit, then proceed to subsequently prosecute said person. The term entrapment is often applied to both proper and improper conduct, it is in the latter sense the term shall be used in this paper. The mortality
``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 book is a correlation themed of masculinity but with a twinge of a common sense approach angle. This enables the readers to play out the entire scene, comprehend all the laid out clues and through relating himself or herself with the major detective in this work, an understanding is easily gained. The style and tone of this piece can only be termed as hard-boiled. ‘Well, sir, there are other means of persuasion besides killing and threatening to kill.’ (119) such blatant disregard for the law is
The Central Park Jogger case is one of false confessions to a crime, with a little help from police, which the defendants did not commit. Evidence taken at the crime scene did exclude the defendants, however, because of videotaped confessions they were sentenced to prison for a crime they admitted to committing even though they did not. It was not until many years later did the original perpetrator step forward from prison to admit he was the one who committed the crime with evidence (DNA) and firsthand knowledge of the scene. The five original defendants were released from prison but until serving a lengthy term. There are cues that can be noticed when investigators are conducting preliminary interviews that have a very high rate of success in determining the guilt or innocence of an individual. Some of these cues may be verbal such as a rehearsed response (Kassin, 2005). Other types of cues may be nonverbal body language such as a slouching (Kassin, 2005).
I wanted to look at the investigative and criminal procedures following the arrest of an alleged criminal and the powerful effects via testimonies and evidence (or lack thereof) it can have on a case.There is an importance of the courts in regards to crime that can’t be over looked. The primary function of the criminal justice system is to uphold the established laws, which define what we understand as deviant in this society.
Varying theories such as rational choice theory, trait theory, and social structure theory are commonly used to explain why crime happens. Application of these three theories in discussing the crimes of Richard Speck can help us to better understand which of the theories may apply and perhaps help give us insight into why he committed his crimes. But they are more beneficial when not looking at a single specific crime, but the person and all the crimes they may have committed throughout their criminal careers.
Young, J. (1981). Thinking seriously about crime: Some models of criminology. In M. Fitzgerald, G. McLennan, & J. Pawson (Eds.), Crime and society: Readings in history and society (pp. 248-309). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Snitching: both authors disagree on this subject. According to Natapoff, “the federal government has been creating criminal snitches and setting them loose” (299). the federal government is letting criminal snitches negotiate the terms to shorten their sentence; some don’t even spend time in prison. However, criminals should watch their backs. Maxwell says, “I do have an answer for catching some,if not all, of these murderers. Snitch” (291). If more citizens would contact the police when they saw or heard of a criminal offense being committed, and this would lead to more
...T., Reiner, R. (2012) ‘Policing the Police’ in The Official Handbook of Criminology. Ed. By Maguire, M., Morgan, R., Reiner, R. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 806- 838
Muncie, J., and Mclaughin, E. (1996) The Problem of Crime. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publication Ltd.
Dostoevski, Feodor. Crime and Punishment. Trans. Jessie Coulson. Ed. George Gibian. New York: Norton, 1964.
Something important and immoral is done in every detective story. Whether the detective is clearing a client of blame or prosecuting someone, he is always on the right side, and working against the wrong. The detective may not always complete his j...
There are several reasons to why people falsely confess to crimes. This will include different analysis from studies carried out by criminal psychologist in order to understand why certain people are prone to falsely confessing to crimes. There are different characteristics to understanding why people confess falsely confess to crimes such as; individual differences, personal and situational factors, and Ethnicity. This essay also aims to identify what leads certain individuals to confess to crimes they did not commit even when the crime can lead to long term prison sentence. Experts within this field suggest that blind eye of justice greatly adds to the reasons to which people still falsely confess to crimes whether it be the law enforcement investigator who continues to pressure a suspect or often times an overzealous prosecutor who refuses to accept that the confession does not march the facts of the case and many reasons.