Can We Prevent False Confessions - Research Paper Example

 Criminal Investigation Can we prevent false confessions? An investigation is a process that aims at collecting information to meet certain objectives. Criminal investigation focuses on acquiring evidence on a crime. This information is crucial in determining whether a crime was committed. It also links the crime to the perpetrators by giving enough evidence that can convict them in a court. Criminal investigation uses the traces left behind by suspects to link them to the crime under investigation (Prade, 2011). This explains why information is important in any criminal investigation because if the investigators collect enough signals, they are in a better position to apprehend the perpetrators. There are a number of information sources at the disposal of criminal investigators. These sources must be carefully scrutinized to establish their accuracy and relevance to the crime. This means that stipulated rules are in place to oversee the procedure of collection of quality evidence. In the context of criminal investigation, a confession is a written or spoken statement that contains admissions made by a person. For a confession to be admissible, the prosecutor is tasked with ensuring that the admissions are made under circumstances that do not make it unreliable. False confessions are admissions made under oppressive circumstances on the part of the individual under interrogation. The voluntary false confession is common in major cases that affect larger masses (Warden, 2009). It entails situations in which people want to get fame. This form of false confession results from unsound mental conditions, perhaps to shield the real perpetrators form facing the law. The compliant false is a confession is made by people who see their confession as the only resort from the situation in which they are in. The witnesses here aim to avoid a real threat or look forward to enjoy some sort of reward. Some false confessions are internalized. Such submissions are made when interrogators coerce suspects into believing they committed a crime. This is common amongst children and teens, fatigued individuals. Developmentally handicapped individuals also give false testimonies. These people have the desire to comply with authority by pleasing them with their false confessions. The interrogation style employed by the interrogator is a cause of false confessions. Certain methods manipulate the defendants by inducements. Witnesses are coerced into giving false testimonies. These confessions are mainly police-induced. Interrogators also make suspects believe that they have incriminating evidence against them yet in real sense, they have none. In some instances, suspects are enticed by either bail or a lenient sentence if they confess. Witnesses and suspects have raised concerns about the hostility and aggression employed by the interrogators (Lassiter, 2010). This happens majorly because of ignorance on the part of the person under interrogation. There are laws that protect witnesses and suspects, but when these individuals are not conversant with these laws, they become subject to manipulation. Most of the defendants confess for fears of physical harm. Interrogators threaten suspects and witnesses that in case they do not testify they might be tortured. Torture creates fear amongst most of the individuals under investigation. Threats of physical harm often cause psychological discomfort and pressurize the defendants to plead with the interrogators. Under circumstances that they fail to do as the interrogators demand of them, they are tortured. The mental state of the individual confessing also is a key determinant in the reliability of the admissions of the individual. In most circumstances, children and teenagers give false confessions compared to adults (Feld, 2013). At this age bracket, children are more likely to admit under intense pressure by the interrogators. People with mentally instability have over the years given false testimonies because they are not aware of the implications of the admissions they make. They are also in fear of disagreeing with the authority. Failures on the part of interrogators can also lead to a number of false confessions. Interrogators should caution the witness or suspect on the consequences of giving false information to law enforcers. These adults mistreat and manhandle children (Feld, 2013). Inaccurate recording of statements made by witnesses also makes it hard for prosecutors to determine the reliability of admissions. Witnesses are given inadequate time to rest between interrogations, so when fatigue sets in witnesses and suspects tend to give controversial statements. Witness bribery is a major cause of false confession. Hefty monetary packages attract even mentally stable individuals to testify just to enjoy the financial advantages that come with the testimony. The interrogators also promise other advantages such as security for the families of the witnesses (Warden, 2009). However, not all false confessions that arise from police interrogation are due to witness bribery, threats of torture, or misleading recording of statements by interrogators. Some factors that induce people to give false testimonies are poor memory, varying anxiety levels and low assertiveness. A guilty individual can be classified as innocent whereas an innocent one convicted for a crime they did not commit. An individual may fit the description of eyewitnesses that were interrogated before him/her. Other suspects are excluded from crimes by virtue of their societal positions or the relationship they hold in the victim’s lives (Lassiter, 2010). This constitutes misclassification of suspects and witnesses, hence lengthening the time for investigating a crime. False confessions can shield the actual perpetrators of a crime from facing justice. The interrogators should do investigations before they begin interrogating witnesses. This distinguishes between physical evidence and submissions collected from witness accounts. Investigations link the crime details to the victim statements and make it difficult for the public or individuals that are not involved in a crime to guess the details of crime. During the grilling, interrogators should avoid making statements that give witnesses hints on the details of the interrogation. Suspect treatment in the interrogation process is important in clearing disputes that arise due to claims of harassment and false confessions that arise due to coercion (Lassiter, 2010). Before interrogations, the initial contact between officers should be recorded to ensure that no tricky tactics are employed in extracting information from witnesses. Interrogations should be electronically recorded, as this is the best-established way of ensuring credibility of a submission. A confession made on camera by a suspect is more reliable and increases public confidence in the quest to find justice for the victims (Warden, 2009). It wipes out misconceptions that arise due to social positions and dealings between victims, witnesses, and suspects. Even after the defendants make their statements, the initial contact should be maintained in order to restrain the police from causing suspects any physical harm. After witnesses make their admissions, interrogators should do a detailed research into the statement of the witness (Prade, 2011). They should not rely only on the submissions of a single witness. They should establish the links between what the witness has stated to the details of their prior investigations. This enables the interrogators to widen the scope of their criminal investigations. Additional investigations after each witness has given an account are necessary. The interrogator does this to fine tune the details of criminal accusation as accounted for. This process is undertaken independently and is treated as new evidence. This eliminates the rigidity of the police system that convicts specific individuals believed by them to be the perpetrators of the crime. Such information will guide the investigator in establishing the reliability of a witness, and determine the probability of calling back the witness to give even further testimonies. To eliminate false witness confessions that arise from mental instability and age maturity, laws should be put in place that restrain such individuals from being interrogated in the absence of relevant representatives. In the presence of parents or guardians, it is difficult to induce opinions on children. Legal representatives are necessary when interrogators are questioning people with unsound minds. The law enforcers must point out the consequences of giving false confessions to witnesses. Stiffer penalties should be put in place to punish witnesses who have been found guilty of giving false admissions. It reduces the prevalence of such trends. It should be made illegal for interrogators to threaten, induce, or lie to suspects and witnesses. In addition to electronic recording of interrogations, such laws restrict people from both the prosecution and the defense to present unfounded allegations before the court. Prosecutors should be aware of the existence of false witness and distinguish between false witnesses and true witnesses. They should restrain from relying on the testimonies of children, teenagers and mentally unstable individuals (Feld, 2013). Defense lawyers should familiarize themselves with possibilities of false confessions and treat the claims made by a client as they are. On the other hand, judges should consider the challenges of ineffective reliability on witness confessions. The judges should enforce laws that suppress false confessions. False confessions occur due to rational choices (Prade, 2011). To prevent and possibly eliminate convictions made from false submissions, all relevant parties in a criminal investigation should accept, understand, and evaluate the possibilities of false submissions. The parties should minimize the risks and consider the factors that qualify a confession as true or false. References Feld, B. (2013). Kids, cops, and confessions inside the interrogation room. New York: New York University Press. Lassiter, G. (2010). Police interrogations and false confessions: Current research, practice, and policy recommendations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Prade, E. (2011). False confessions. Palo Alto: Propaganda Press. Warden, R. (2009). True stories of false confessions. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press. Read More