Melanie Matousek
Bryan / Distefano
English 11
9 January 9, 2018
Why do people confess to things they didn’t do? People seem to falsely confess to the crimes they were unintentionally were manipulated into. Some people confess to crimes they did not commit, because of psychology, innocence, and interrogation. Other people think they committed these crimes but they are mistaken.
Some people confess because they are interrogated and manipulated. Stephanie Overman is speaking on behalf of the Society for Human Resource Management. She is speaking about The Reid Technique which is a technique that covers everything from the furniture in the interview room to the behavior of the interrogator. It states “Interrogators are instructed to offer a moral justification for the suspects wrong doing, in order to persuade the suspect to confess” (Overman 6). The point of this is that the interrogators are trained and manipulate the suspect into believing they did something wrong, however they did not people tend to crack and confess because they feel pressured and have pure fear.
…show more content…
During research the article was explaining the mental state of the confessor and how it affects what they say. People with a poor mental state tend to be influenced to a conclusion that is not the truth and be completely innocent. The article states "people with disabilities are likely to give a false confession, because they are tempted to accommodate and respect authority" (Innocence Project Of...3). This explains that people with special needs feel as if they have to give the police in a sense "what they want to hear" however are completely innocent. Another example of this is " false confessions have figured in 24 percent of the approx. 289 convictions by DNA according to the Innocence Project" (New York Times 8). If a suspect did not commit a crime they are innocent but are tried to be proven
In addition, Chapman (2013) also argued that there are a lot of factors that determine whether a suspect make a false confession or not. In fact he indicated that :“ those who make false confessions do so because of a combination of mental elements, personality, intelligence, and the environment of the interrogation,” ( Chapman, 2013, p.164) The author also explained that the police usually isolate, accuse, and convey sympathy to the suspect ( Chapman,2013,p.165). Though, Ford, in the Norfolk Four, used
In a handful of occasions such as in an interrogation it seems reasonable enough to lie to an individual in order for them to confess to a crime. A case law that shows this was Frazier v. Cupp in which according to Police Link, “ The case involved the interrogation of a homicide suspect who was falsely told that an accomplice had already implicated the suspect in the killing.” In the case of Frazier v. Cupp kept on getting integrated even after he asked to speak to a lawyer so as a result he ended up doing a written confession where he confessed about being part of the murder that was later used as evidence against him.
Kassin, Saul M. (1997). “The psychology of confession evidence.” American Psychologist 52 (1997): 221-233. Web. 8 January 2014.
In fact, the minute they bring someone in on reasonable suspicion, there is an 80% chances of the suspect being the guilty party. Therefore, beyond reasonable doubt a blurred line is established. Detectives have evidence to bring in the suspect, getting them to confess becomes the mission of the case. Whether or not they are innocent or guilty doesn’t matter, for chances are their suspect is in fact guilty. And the faster they book someone, the better their arrest record gets, and the further they can advance their career. If it means overlook some information and just aim to get the confession, to pull an arrest, it will
When confronted with a problem, why does the human brain default to lying? Dishonesty is never a solution, although it may seem like the best option in the spur of a moment. My grandma always gave the example of her youth: she avoided and deceived her friend’s sister because the little girl riled everyone. Come to find out, the sister passed the following month due to an illness. I could never imagine the guilt she experienced. Nevertheless, everyone has been deceitful before and many characters were in the tragedy, The Crucible, by playwright Arthur Miller. Reasons for lying are understandable, but most people will admit that mendacity has only caused pain. Lying’s outcome is never positive: it may seem like a good option, for falsehood can save a person’s life, benefit someone, and it eases stress, but these are all transitory.
While reading "Neuromancer", one may become extremely baffled if he or she cannot interpret the terminology used or the framework in which the book is written. Hence, the use of the formalistic approach is necessary in order for the reader to actually understand the concepts trying to be declared by Gibson. Through the formalistic approach one can begin to see that Gibson uses repetition, and specific word choice to set the tone for the novel, and imagery to relate the content of the book to the lives of his readers.
False confessions are receiving more public attention now that people are speaking out about having to serve jail time for a crime they did not commit. 2015 was a year to remember for false confessions starting in January when a man was released after serving 21 years in prison. The protocols that interrogators are trained to follow are dangerous because they allow investigators to have complete influence on innocent people to make false confessions.
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.
Newring, K. B., & O'Donohue, W. (2008). False confessions and influenced witnesses. Applied Psychology In Criminal Justice, 4(1), 81-107.
Ofshe, Richard J., and Richard A. Leo. The Social Psychology of Police Interrogation: The Theory and Classification of True and False Confessions (1997). Web. 28 Nov. 2011.
Among various arrests, people who are put in jail or prison due to their confession must make them a proven criminal, right? Unfortunately, not everybody who confesses to a crime is in fact guilty. A false confession is an act of confessing to a crime that the confessor didn’t commit. That creates a conflict involving the individual being accused and the trust towards police interrogation. For instance, after nearly eight years in prison, Nicole Harris sued eight Chicago police detectives, alleging that they coerced her confession (Meiser Para.2) The police detectives incorrectly informed Harris in failing “the polygraph test” indicating that she lied about not committing the murder of her son, Jaquari Dancy (Meiser). She felt that there was
In order to better understand why people confess to crimes they have not committed, Kassin an...
The purpose or “goal of [an] interrogation is to facilitate the act of confessing [and obtaining truth]” (Leo & Thomas, 1998). The problem arises when an officer sits down with a suspect in an attempt to gain information or a confession; however, the suspect refuses to cooperate. So how can an officer facilitate the process and get a suspect to talk or even better, confess? Years ago this was accomplished by police through the use of force also known as police brutality. That practice has been abandoned due to the infringement of individual rights. Police were forced to seek an alternate means of obtaining information that did not rely on inhumane practices. This turnaround came in the form of trickery and deceit; called interrogatory deception. This type of psychological coercion is taught and practiced daily by today’s law enforcement. It is based on the utilitarian standpoint by police that the means justifies the outcome. This type of interrogation is performed in a way “which elicits admissions by deceiving suspects who have waived their right to remain silent” (Skolnick & Leo, 1992). For example, an officer co...
How can one know if an admission of confessional evidence is not false? One test proposed on confession is that without independent evidence which corroborates the admission, the confession should not be admitted in evidence. One viewpoint would suggest this would help the authenticity of confessions and deter people from creating false confessions and protect the innocent from unjust convictions, though the justice system requires a balance between this and the ability to convict those which are guilty. Furthermore, a reform implemented as such would undermine the value that is put on confession as being regarded as the highest form of
In conclusion there are numerous ways of understanding why people falsely confess to crimes. The police and other investigatory agencies play significant roles in prompting false confessions. As research in this essay has shown, individual differences, stereotypical threats, personal and situational factors can lead to reasons why false confessions occur. The ways in which police and other law enforcement agencies investigative certain suspects must make sure that the conditions in which suspects are placed in does not give suspects reasons to falsely confess. The different ways mentioned in this essay in understanding why people falsely confess to crimes have great potential in improving legit contributions to improving criminal justice practice, as they can help reduce the number of suspects who are put in these predicaments to testify truthfully.