The Psychology of the Courts

Week 2 Weekly Notes: False Confessions Imagine spending 30 years in a penitentiary, sentenced for a crime you didnt commit. Horrifying, right? Now imagine that same scenario, but knowing that the reason you are there is because you confessed to a crime you didnt commit. This second scenario sounds absolutely incomprehensible, but for thousands of prisoners, it is true. If an individual confesses to a crime in the adversarial system, then the trial is cancelled, the case is settled, and sentencing begins. In other words, no further investigation is carried out. This is because there is an assumption that criminal suspects and defendants would not confess to a crime they have not committed. But, as described above, this is simply not true. Thanks to technological advances in forensic science, like DNA from biological materials (e.g., saliva, hair, blood, semen, or skin), the guilt or innocence of suspects or defendants has often been cast into doubt. Scientific evidence has confirmed that many people, despite their confessions, are actually not guilty. Scientific technology like DNA is important, but in this programme, its the psychology thats important. What is the psychological reasoning for confessing to a crime you didnt commit? How can interrogators accept false confessions? Why not stay silent? How suggestible are people and in what circumstances? This week, you examine some of the reasons why a suspect or defendant might falsely confess to a crime. The research in this area comes from primarily from the United Kingdom and the United States, where many false confessions have been identified. You then explore the concept of suggestibility, analysing whether it is valid psychology or an excuse for confessing.

The Psychology of the Courts 1/10 Copyright - Laureate Online Education All rights reserved, 2000 2011 The module, in all its parts: syllabus, guidelines, lectures, discussion questions, technical notes, images and any additional material is copyrighted by Laureate Online Education B.V. Last update: September 13, 2011

Confessions A confession is the most valuable commodity that can occur in any criminal justice system because it removes doubts about a suspects guilt and provides a swift resolution to a criminal case. However, at the beginning of the 1980s, doubts began to arise about the guilt of some confessors. Incredible as it may seem, some extremely high-profile cases were found to have contained false confessions. A false confession is an admission of guilt to a crime when the confessor is not guilty of that crime. For example, you may be familiar with the famous cases of the Birmingham Six and the Guilford Four in the UK, where some of the suspects voluntarily confessed and their confessions were later determined to have been false. These cases helped highlight how often false confessions occur in the criminal justice and judicial systems. Since 1989, the first time DNA was used to exonerate a defendant, 240 people in the U.S. have been proven innocent via DNA evidence. Of that 240, between 1520% involved false confessions to serious crimes like rape and murder (Kassin, et. al, 2010). Furthermore, this statistic may be an underestimation of the actual levels of false confession because DNA evidence is likely to be more available for certain crimes (e.g., rape and murder).

Police interrogation You now know what a false confessions is and how prominent they are in our criminal justice and legal systems. What you dont know, and are probably wondering, is why someone would confess to a crime he or she didnt commit! One of the main reasons is police interview and interrogation tactics. Researchers have identified that in the U.S., not all police interviews have a goal of obtaining the truth (Leo, 2008). Instead, the focus tends to be on gaining a confession. To that end, professional police interrogators often utilize the Reid technique of interviewing. This technique consists of two stages. The first is a behavioural analysis interview (BAI), in which general
The Psychology of the Courts 2/10 Copyright - Laureate Online Education All rights reserved, 2000 2011 The module, in all its parts: syllabus, guidelines, lectures, discussion questions, technical notes, images and any additional material is copyrighted by Laureate Online Education B.V. Last update: September 13, 2011

background information regarding the suspect is gathered, a rapport is built, and police make a determination whether a suspect is telling the truth. If the suspect is thought to be untruthful, then the process moves to the next stage. The second stage consists of a nine-step interrogative process, reducible to three main parts (Kassin & Gudjonsson, 2004): (1) custody and isolationin which the suspect is detained and isolated, generating anxiety and uncertainty and increasing incentives to remove him or herself from the situation; (2) confrontationthe suspect is accused of a crime and evidence (real or manufactured) is presented to support police accusations, while the suspects denials are refuted as attempts to deceive; (3) minimizationthe interrogator sympathizes with the suspect to gain his or her trust and morally justifies the crime, leading the suspect to believe that he or she will be viewed sympathetically if they admit guilt. Interrogation techniques lead to false confessions, but they do not explain the psychology of the event.

But why falsely confess? Humans are inherently social beings who are vulnerable to the influence of others. With enough time, humans eventually comply and are persuaded to behave in ways that, at first, are alien to them. This is particularly true if individuals in authority are sending the message. Police bring that authority through power, proximity, and numbers (i.e., many officers) during interrogations. For some people, this influence becomes overwhelming. Indeed, the authority influence during interrogation weakens the suspects ability to make appropriate decisions. This is exacerbated by other (questionably ethical) factors, like refusing to let a suspect use the bathroom, interrogating the suspect for days without sleep or food, and keeping the suspect in unfamiliar surroundings. The mental fortitude of the suspect is strained, weakened, and eventually destroyed. At that point, the suspect is only able to understand the maximum costs of denial and the minimum costs of confessing. For the suspect, the interrogation becomes a nightmare in
The Psychology of the Courts 3/10 Copyright - Laureate Online Education All rights reserved, 2000 2011 The module, in all its parts: syllabus, guidelines, lectures, discussion questions, technical notes, images and any additional material is copyrighted by Laureate Online Education B.V. Last update: September 13, 2011

which confessing seems like the only way to wake up. Interrogators may even encourage suspects in this way (e.g., Confess and this will all be over.) In sum, suspects confess when they are motivated to do so. They may believe the evidence against them is strong, especially when fabricated by interrogators in an authority position. They may already suffer with feelings of guilt or shame, sometimes unrelated to the case, and confession is an appealing way to release. They may be unable to cope with confinement and believe that confessing will allow them to go home. Finally, they may see confession as a way of stopping all their current suffering.

Who falsely confesses and types of false confessions Research conducted by Drizin and Leo (2004), revealed that 93% of false confessors were men; 81% of these confessed to murder, 8% to rape and 3% to arson. The most common reason why these confessions were found to be false were: the real perpetrator was found (74%) or new scientific evidence was discovered (46%). People most vulnerable to false confessions were young (63% were under 25 years; 32% were under 18) and 22% had learning disabilities (mental retardation). Oddly, more than one false confession was identified for the same crime in 30% of cases (see the Leo, 2010, paper for a good example of this), which shows that when one false confession is elicited this can lead to others also confessing. False confessions are generally one of three types: voluntary, coercedcompliant or coerced-internalized. Those who falsely confess voluntarily may do so because: they crave notoriety, need to self punish, need to relieve guilt they feel for past misdemeanors, lack the ability to distinguish fact from fantasy, or have a desire to protect the truly guilty person. Coerced-compliant confessors are those who look at short-term benefits rather than long-term costs. They may believe they will be allowed to: go home, sleep, eat, make a phone call, etc.; all short-term potential benefits but paid for with long-term
The Psychology of the Courts 4/10 Copyright - Laureate Online Education All rights reserved, 2000 2011 The module, in all its parts: syllabus, guidelines, lectures, discussion questions, technical notes, images and any additional material is copyrighted by Laureate Online Education B.V. Last update: September 13, 2011

costs (i.e., a prison sentence). Coerced-compliant confessors desire, above all, to end the interview. Coerced-internalized are those confessors who come to believe they are actually guilty. These are generally people who distrust their own memories and believe the interragator, a person in authority, has more information than they do. They may also have been intoxicated at the time of the crime and be unable to fully remember facts. Characteristics of people most vulnerable to false confession include compliant individuals and suggestible individuals. Compliant individuals are those who are eager to please others and who have a need to protect their self-esteem when in the company of others. They wish, above all, to avoid confrontation and conflict, particularly with authority figures. People who are highly suggestible are also particularly vulnerable to false confessions. Suggestible individuals tend to have poor memories, high levels of anxiety, low self-esteem, and lack assertiveness. However, levels of suggestibility tend to increase in certain circumstances. For example, if an individual suffers from a lack of sleep and/or alcohol withdrawal. Another example of suggestibility increasing in certain circumstances is being held in custody, which increases anxiety two ways, both due to separation from peers and the anxiety associated with uncertainty for the future. In addition, a lack of control and autonomy coupled with the length of interrogation can negatively affect an individuals ability to make rational decisions. When someone sees an outcome as inevitable, he or she has a tendency to begin a process of acceptance. Presenting a suspect with evidence, even if it does not exist (allowed in U.S, but not in most of Europe), may instill a sense of inevitability that the suspect reacts to both cognitively and motivationally to accept. For instance, a tactic commonly used in the U.S. is to tell a suspect that s/he has failed a polygraph (lie detector) test when this is not true, creating a sense of the inevitable in a suspect.

Why not remain silent?

The Psychology of the Courts 5/10 Copyright - Laureate Online Education All rights reserved, 2000 2011 The module, in all its parts: syllabus, guidelines, lectures, discussion questions, technical notes, images and any additional material is copyrighted by Laureate Online Education B.V. Last update: September 13, 2011

Suspects have two defences to police interviews and interrogations: a right to remain silent and a right to legal counsel (i.e., a lawyer). Generally, invoking these rights requires the interview or interrogation to stop immediately. For example, if a police officer is questioning you, and you say, I want to speak with my lawyer, the officer must cease questioning and allow you to speak with your lawyer. Similarly, if you were to say, I invoke my right to remain silent, the officer must accept your refusal to speak. In the UK, this is known as the right to silence, and in the U.S. it is called Miranda rights. For those individuals vulnerable to false confessions it may seem odd that they do not invoke this right and thus avoid the interrogative process. However, research shows that many peopleparticularly the young or the learning disableddo not necessarily know these rights exist, let alone understand them, even though officers are required to read them to every suspect. More troubling is that innocent suspects often waive their rights to silence because they believe they have a rapport with police and do not need to stay silent. For example, innocents will waive their rights in order to demonstrate to police that they have nothing to hide. They believe if they invoke their rights they will appear more suspicious. Thus, it seems that people have a nave belief that their innocence will set them free (Kassin, 2005).

False confessions and juries Research findings show that juries are influenced by false confessions. Drizin and Leo (2004) found that even when a suspect has retracted his/her confession and the evidence is strongly in favor of acquittal, juries returned guilty verdicts in 7381% of cases. The authors concluded that confession evidence, even when retracted and even if the evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is not guilty, will lead to a jury conviction.

The Psychology of the Courts 6/10 Copyright - Laureate Online Education All rights reserved, 2000 2011 The module, in all its parts: syllabus, guidelines, lectures, discussion questions, technical notes, images and any additional material is copyrighted by Laureate Online Education B.V. Last update: September 13, 2011

Reducing false confessions By the 1990s, the UK realized that something had to be done about wrongful convictions from false confessions. This led to substantial changes in police interviewing techniques. For example, the UK police began to train officers using the PEACE model of interviewing. PEACE stands for Preparation and Planning, Engage and Explain, Account and Clarification, Closure and Evaluation. This model is currently employed in many other countries (e.g., New Zealand and Norway), and is designed to account for those people vulnerable to false confessions, minimizing that risk (Shawyer, Milne & Bull, 2009). The central tenets of the PEACE model are that interviews must be fair, open, workable, and centre on finding the truth rather than eliciting a confession. However, some research has found that a number of police officers tend to resort to the Reid style of interrogation anyways (e.g., Pearse & Gudjonsson, 1999), and elicit false confessions (Gudjonsson, 2003). Indeed, more recent work shows that police interviewers do tend to use the PEACE model regularly (Bull & Soukara, 2010). However, whether this form of interviewing technique does adequately reduce false confessions remains to be seen, since research still needs to be conducted on this style of interviewing (Bull & Soukara, 2010).

In the courtroom At trial, a defendant who has confessed will usually try to suppress his or her confession with a Motion to Supress. Supressing a confession means to exclude that confession from the trial completely because the confession was not a valid confession (i.e., the jury will never see it and the judge must not rule based on it). In other words, by making a Motion to Supress, a defendant is saying, My confession was not valid for one of a number of reasons (e.g., duress, coersion, force, or even implied promises by interrogators). Whether a

The Psychology of the Courts 7/10 Copyright - Laureate Online Education All rights reserved, 2000 2011 The module, in all its parts: syllabus, guidelines, lectures, discussion questions, technical notes, images and any additional material is copyrighted by Laureate Online Education B.V. Last update: September 13, 2011

confession is valid and should be suppressed revolves around complicated legal rules of evidence best left to lawyers.

In Practise In this weeks Discussion, you analyse the concept of suggestibility. Think about whether this is a valid psychological concept or a ruse to withdraw otherwise valid confessions. In other words, you will analyse whether suggestibility is something a suspect might fake after re-thinking his or her confession so as to attribute that confession to police interrogation tactics. Also, begin to consider what type of person might try to use suggestibility to suppress an otherwise valid confession. In this weeks Hand-in, you analyse suggestibility and the stereotypes surrounding suggestible people. To begin, you need to think about who is likely to be suggestible and why. Try to think widely on this issue, especially if you think you are not the suggestible type. Certainly, suggestibility is highly relevant to false confessions, but consider other areas of the criminal justice system where it might be relevant. Think about the characteristics of people you think are likely to be suggestible and why you think these characteristics make some people more suggestible than others. Examine the cases in this weeks learning resource and consider whether, before reading those resources, you would have though those individuals who falsely confessed were suggestible. If not, is there a possibility that some people may become suggestible at certain times and under specific conditions? If so, what might these be and how would police interrogation practices influence this? In your writing, be sure to use research and this weeks resources to support your arguments. Whilst your opinions are important, you must justify them with research support. Also, if something you have read in other areas of this module or another module is relevant, please include it, as this will

The Psychology of the Courts 8/10 Copyright - Laureate Online Education All rights reserved, 2000 2011 The module, in all its parts: syllabus, guidelines, lectures, discussion questions, technical notes, images and any additional material is copyrighted by Laureate Online Education B.V. Last update: September 13, 2011

demonstrate your ability to make appropriate links between different theoretical concepts.

References Bull, R., & Soukara, S. (2010). Four studies of what really happens in police interviews. In G. D. Lassiter & C. A. Meissner (Eds.), Police interrogations and false confessions (pp. 8195). New York, NY: American Psychological Association. Drizin, S. A., & Leo, R. A. (2004). The problem of false confessions in the post-DNA world. North Carolina Law Review, 82, 8911007. Gudjonsson, G. H. (2003). The psychology of interrogations and confessions: A handbook. Chichester, England: Wiley. Kassin, S. M. (2005). On the psychology of confessions: Does innocence put innocents at risk? American Psychologist, 60(3), 215228. Kassin, S. M., Drizin, S. A., Grisso, T., Gudjonsson, G. H., Leo, R. A., & Redlich, A. P. (2010). Police-induced confessions: Risk factors and recommendations. Law and Human Behavior, 34(1), 338. Kassin, S. M., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (2004). The psychology of confessions: A review of the literature and issues. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5(2), 3367. Leo, R. A. (2008). Police interrogation and American justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Pearse, J., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (1999). Measuring influential police interviewing tactics: A factor analytic approach. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 4(2), 221238.

The Psychology of the Courts 9/10 Copyright - Laureate Online Education All rights reserved, 2000 2011 The module, in all its parts: syllabus, guidelines, lectures, discussion questions, technical notes, images and any additional material is copyrighted by Laureate Online Education B.V. Last update: September 13, 2011

Shawyer, A., Milne, B., & Bull, R. (2009). Investigative interviewing in the UK. In T. Williamson, B. Milne & S. Savage (Eds.), International developments in investigative interviewing (pp. 2438). Devon, England: Willan.

The Psychology of the Courts 10/10 Copyright - Laureate Online Education All rights reserved, 2000 2011 The module, in all its parts: syllabus, guidelines, lectures, discussion questions, technical notes, images and any additional material is copyrighted by Laureate Online Education B.V. Last update: September 13, 2011