|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Monday, February 26, 2007
They Don't Get It
In the Texas
case I last posted about, I noted that the court disbelieved that the suspect was promised leniency. But the court went further, suggesting that even if the detective made the alleged promise, it did not
amount to improper coercion. The defendant testified that he was promised that, if he confessed, “I would not be held accountable
for actions or something of that sort.” The court of appeals held that “this assertion is vague at best, and does not amount
to a positive promise that would likely induce a false confession.”
In fact, as all false confession
experts know, even subtle hints can be interpreted as implying leniency. To allow
interrogators to make various assurances, as long as they stop short of “a positive promise,” is to invite false confessions.
Send a comment
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Go To The Tape
Earlier this month a court of appeals
in Texas
rejected a convicted defendant’s contention that his confession was coerced. The
defendant claimed that he was promised leniency if he confessed, the Court observed, but “no such promise appears on the videotape
of appellant’s statement.” Of course, very few detectives will make such a promise
with the cameras rolling. That’s all the more reason to let them roll –during the entire interrogation, not just the confession
itself.
Send a comment
Monday, February 19, 2007
On The Case
7:25 am est
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
Economics of Videotaping Continued
Adding to my recent post on the economic
logic behind videotaping all interrogations, a public defender writes:
“According to our local sheriff,
there are currently 250 inmates in our local jail awaiting trial on murder charges. Many of these cases, including two
of my own, are several years old, and many of the clients have been in custody for four or more years. Most of these
cases involve some interrogation; most of those would settle or go to trial earlier and faster if the interrogations were
taped from the beginning.”
Send a comment
Monday, February 12, 2007
Economic Logic Of Videotaping
Responding to the civil settlements I’ve posted about, a visitor argues cogently that
cities would save themselves a lot of money if they videotaped interrogations:
“If I wanted to run for office on fiscal responsibility grounds, I’d make taping every
interview of every witness that was at the police station a priority. Digital
recorders built into $30 mp3 players, CD-roms that go for ten cents, $10 flash drives that hold 25 times what my first hard
drive did and fit on a key chain: There's no excuse for not taping EVERYTHING. Some
smarter police departments finally got the idea and realized that, when officers tape everything during their interactions
with witnesses and suspects, good things happen. The philistines instead want to enact immunity laws [which protect the police
from lawsuit].”
It’s absolutely true that videotaping interrogations is good for everyone – taxpayers
and law enforcement very much included.
Send a comment
Thursday, February 8, 2007
False Plea Bargains
A visitor writes:
I have a friend whose life has been
shattered by a false confession, a plea bargain. . . . . A visit from his daughters brought his world crashing down around him. They went swimming in the apartment
pool. His youngest daughter was jumping to her dad from the side when she slipped and injured herself on the rocks around
the edge. Within a few days, he had charges filed against him for indecency with a child. He had never been in trouble before
and had very little money. . . . After two years of postponements and a couple lie detector tests (which he passed), the anxiety
was more than he could take. His attorney urged him to plea bargain and told him otherwise, if found guilty, he could be facing
a 20 year prison term. He was coerced into signing a confession of guilt that led to a 10 year probated sentence.”
But, according to the visitor, the
shame and other effects of the conviction have devastated her friend. The story is a reminder that quite a few false confessions
arise in the plea bargaining context. A confession may seem like the least bad
option, but the false confessor often comes to regret it and cannot set the record straight.
Send a comment
Monday, February 5, 2007
What Can You Do?
A visitor writes: “Before my son was accused [of sexual assault] I always assumed if someone was accused that they were probably
guilty. Why would they arrest someone if they didn't have the evidence? I never gave a thought as to how confessions were
obtained. The only real evidence was his confession. After hours of screaming, accusing, lying, and telling him they were
charging him with rape and that he would never see his kids again, he finally broke. . . . What can the average citizen do
to change the law? Maybe it is not too late to save others from the heartbreak that my family has suffered. How can we work
to get this changed?”
At this point, probably the most effective action ordinary citizens can take is to write
your state legislators urging mandatory taping of all interrogations.
Send a comment
Thursday, February 1, 2007
Prosecutorial Disqualification
Mike Nifong was right (at long last) to disqualify himself from the prosecution of the Duke lacrosse players. Nifong
was hopelessly compromised by the politics of the situation and his own public assertions of the defendants’ guilt. I have
long recommended prosecutorial disqualification in similar circumstances involving false confessions. Whenever DNA or other
powerful evidence suggests the innocence of someone convicted on the basis of his confession, the case should be turned over
to a new prosecutor. In case after case, even after DNA exonerations, prosecutors refuse to admit error and call for the innocent
man’s release. They dig in, and justice is delayed or altogether denied.
Send a comment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
