Why Do People Confess to Crimes They Did Not Commit - Literature review Example

Serapio Maria Perpetua A. Serapio Academia-Research Topic: Why do people confess to crimes they did not commit? (forensic psychology) December 9, 2008 False Confessions There have been extensive studies done by known specialists in the field of forensic psychology which dealt with the question of why people confess to a crime they did not commit. Under the law, custodial investigation is defined as any questioning initiated by law officers after a person has been taken to custody.2 Republic Act (RA) 7433 provides that custodial investigation includes the practice of issuing a mere invitation to a person to be investigated for an offense he is suspected to have committed. It is stated that the Miranda Rights are the rights embraced by Article III, Sec 12(1) which includes investigations prior to the filing of charges. It is when the inquiry is under the control of the police officers.3 It is important to note that in the Miranda rights, it is specified that what makes evidence admissible are only extra-judicial confessions or admissions made during custodial investigation.4 What the Constitution prohibits is the use of physical or moral compulsion to extort communication from the accused, but not an inclusion of his body in evidence, when it may be material. In fact, an accused may validly be compelled to be photographed or measured, or his garments or shoes _______________________________ 1 Revised Penal Code , Art. III Sec 12(1) 2 Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 U.S., 448 3 Revised Penal Code Art III Sec 12(1) 4 People vs. Malimit, 246 SCRA 167, (1996) Serapio 2 removed or replaced, or to move his body to enable the foregoing things to be done, without running afoul of the proscription against testimonial compulsion.5 With this in view, the accused must know that the act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant fact may be given in evidence against him. 6 The declaration of an accused acknowledging his guilt of the offense charged, or of any offense necessarily included therein, may be given in evidence against him.7 The rule that an extrajudicial statement is evidence only against the person making it also recognizes various exceptions. Once such exception worth noting is the rule that where several persons are charged with an offense and there could have been collusion with reference to said several confessions, the fact that statements are in all material respects identical is confirmatory of the confession of the co-defendants and is admissible against the person implicated therein to show probability of the latter’s actual participation in the commission of the crime and may likewise serve as collaborative evidence if it is clear from other facts and circumstances that other persons have participated in the perpetration of the crime charged and proved. These are known as “interlocking confessions.”8 According to the study made by the Innocence Project at Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School indicated that about 25% DNA exoneration cases out of 198 wrongful convictions. It said that these innocent defendants made incriminating statements, delivering outright confessions or plead guilty. They further stated that these confessions are not always prompted by internal knowledge or actual guilt, but are sometimes motivated by external factors.9 ____________ 5 Gutang vs. People, G.R. 135406, July 11, 2000, 129 SCAD 433 6 Rules of Court, Rule 130 Sec 26. 7 Rules of Court, Rule 130, Sec 33, People vs. Calvo, Jr., 269 SCRA 676 8 People vs. Encipido, 146 SCRA 478 (1986); People vs. Domondon, 43 SCRA 486 (1972); People vs. Sta Maria 15 SCRA 222 (1965) 9 Innocence Project, Understand the Causes: False Confessions Serapio 3 In 2004, Professor Richard Leo and Professor Steven Drizin found that 81 percent of these confessions involved murders, which led them to conclude that murder suspects are the most at risk of falsely confessing because it is in these cases where the pressure on the police to solve the crimes are the greatest and these police are most likely to the full range of coercive psychological interrogation tactics.10 It has been further noted by Hollida Wakefield , M.A. and Ralph Underwager, Ph.D. that police may engage in deceptive and coercive interrogations to obtain confessions. When a confession is later retracted, judges and juries must assess the totality of the circumstances surrounding the confession, including the interrogation techniques used and the effects of these tactics on the particular defendant. A suspect who is vulnerable and confused or who is given false evidence by a coercive interrogator may produce a false confession. Expert testimony may be necessary to help jurors understand the circumstances that lead to non- voluntary confessions.11 The main question of this study is the search into the reasons why false confessions happen? What are the compelling reasons that innocent people tend to incriminate themselves during police interrogation? What are the reasons behind why innocent people confess to crimes they did not commit? In reference to the study made by Kassin and Wrightsman (1985) based on the anecdotal literature (Reik, 1959l; Schafer, 1968; Zimbardo, 1967) which has led them to distinguish among three psychologically distinct types of false confessions, namely: voluntary false confession, compliant false confession and internalized false confession.12 _________________________________ 10 Drizin, Steven, Legal Director of the on Wrongful Convictions, Northwestern, Psychological Interrogation Tactics Can Lead To False Confessions, Updated 10:35 a.m. PT, Tue., May 1, 2007 11 Wakefield, Hollida, M.A., Underwager, Ralph, Ph.D., Library Resources, Coerced or Nonvoluntary Confessions 12 Conti, Richard, The Journal of Credibility Assessment and Witness Psychology, 1999, Vol.2, No. 1, Published by the Department of Psychology of Boise State University, The Psyholology of False Confessions. Serapio 4 The three psychologically distinct types of false confessions are voluntary false confession, compliant false confession and internalized false confession and are described as the following:12 (1) Voluntary False Confessions. (a) One reason for voluntary false confessions is the result of a person wanting to become famous. The classic example cited in relation to this type of false confession is the Lindbergh kidnapping case when the baby of the aviator Charles Lindbergh was kidnapped in 1932. More than 200 people came forward to confess that they kidnapped the said baby. Another landmark case cited is in the 1980s where Henry Lee Lucas who falsely admitted to hundreds of unsolved murders, thereby making him the most prolific serial killer in history. The analysis made was that these individuals voluntarily give false confessions for the following reasons including a pathological desire for notoriety; a conscious or unconscious need to expiate feelings of guilt over prior transgressions; an inability to distinguish fact from fantasy; and a desire to aid and protect the real criminal.13 (b) Another reason found was that these false confessions are offered to protect a friend or relative, a fact often revealed in interviews with juvenile defenders.14 An example of such a case is the case described by Huff, Rattner & Sagarin, (1996) which describes a scenario in which an innocent husband and wife are being held by the police and the man falsely confessed to allow the wife to return home to tend to the children.15 (c) Other possible motives for voluntary false confessions include an “unconscious _________________ 13 Kassin, S.M., Gudjononsson, G.H, Scientific American, may 19, 2005, True Crimes, False Confessions, Why Do People Confess To Crimes They Did Not Commit? 14 Gudjonsson, 1992; Gudjonsson & Mackeith, 1990. 15 Huff, C.R., Rattner, A., & Sagarin, E., (1996), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, Convicted but Innocent: Wrongful Conviction and Public Policy Serapio 5 need to expiate guilt over previous transgressions through self-punishment.”16 As Gudjonsson (d) Other possible motives for voluntary false confessions include an “unconscious need to expiate guilt over previous transgressions through self-punishment.”16 As Gudjonsson (1992) points out that a previous transgression can be either a real or imagined act. He further states that the transgression does not necessarily have to be identifiable, “some individuals have a high level of generalized guilt, which is not related to a specific transgression, and this may influence a range of their behaviors, including their need to volunteer false confessions; (e) According to the personal experience of Richard P. Conti , he has seen cases where individuals who have committed a crime and carries with it a large penalty will falsely confess to a lesser crime to avoid the more severe punishment associated with the original crime.17 (2) Compliant False Confessions According to the study made by Charles Montaldo, a person basically confesses because they see confessing as the only way out of the situation that they find themselves in at that very moment.18 It is said that that coerced confessions occur when suspects, despite the knowledge of their innocence, due to extreme methods of police interrogations. 19 It has been noted that numerous false confessions that were elicited through the use of torture, threats, and promises were presumed to be of this type, as in the Salem witchcraft confessions in the 17th century.20 According to records one of the known classic example of a coerced-compliant confession is the case of Brown v Mississippi (1936). According to studies, deception is justified by the police as a necessary evil in order _________________________________ 16 Kassin & Wrightman, 1985 p. 77 17 Conti, Richard. P. The Journal of Credibility Assessment and Witness Psychology, 1999, Vol 2, No.1, Published by the Department of Psychology of Boise State University,The Psychology of False Confessions. 18 Montaldo, C., Why Innocent People Make False Confessions? 19 Gudjonsson, 1991, 1992; Gudjonsson & Mackeith, 1990; Kassin, 1997; Kassin & Wrightsman, 1985; Wrightsman & Kassin, 1993. 20 Kassin & Wrightsman, 1985; Wrightsman & Kassin, 199 Serapio 6 According to studies, deception is justified by the police as a necessary evil in order to obtain convictions of guilty people. The study made by Skolnick (1982) indicates that police officers move from investigation to testimony. This system, including the training academies and the courts however permit if not silently encourage deception as a tool to get a confession during the investigation phase. There is a thin line between entrapment and acceptable deceit which up to the present is vague and unclear. They are still using the Machiaveli principle where “the end justifies the means.” In Miranda v Arizona, which was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1966, 21 Inbau and Reid (1962) produced a book titled Criminal Interrogation, they got quotes from therein which show that police use deception and psychologically coercive methods in interrogation.22 Based on the book of Inbau and Reid (1962), the courts have found out that there are 16 strategies of interrogation proposed indicated therein . This book remains to be a widely used text for training police. The three major themes used in police interrogation are: (a) Reattributes the implications of the situation by shifting the blame or minimizing the seriousness of the crime; (b) It attempts to frighten the individual by exaggerating the evidence available, telling the person that the interrogator knows he is guilty, or stressing the consequences thereat; (c) Makes an emotional appeal through showing sympathy, flattery, and respect, and by ppealing to the best interests of the suspect. The court finds this practices inherently appealing to the best interests of the suspect. The court finds this practices inherently _________________ 21 Miranda v Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) 22 Inbau, F.E., Reid, J.E. (1962), Criminal Interrogation and Confessions (3rd ed.) (A) Baltimore, M.D.: Williams and Wilkins. Serapio 7 coercive. According to the notes of Leo (1996b)23 that American police have become extremely skilled at the practice of manipulation and deception during interrogation. He further states (Leo 1996c)24 at one of the most one of the most troubling aspects of false confessions resulting from such police interrogations is that the police leaders and trainers deny that their highly manipulative and deceptive interrogation tactics may produce confessions from entirely innocent persons. He observes that, due to widely held belief among police enforcers that virtually all suspects are guilty and will confess only if they are, in fact, guilty, the interrogator may elicit a false confession without realizing it. Leo further believes that many criminal suspects remain incarcerated for crimes they did not commit as a result of false confessions. (3) Coerced-Internalized False Confessions According to Kassin (1997) the third type of false confession is coerced-internalized, that is, when suspects who are innocent, but anxious, fatigued, pressured, or confused, and then subjected to highly suggestive methods of police interrogation, actually come to believe that they committed the crime. 25 In the studies made on this topic it has been proven that there are remarkable cases involving coerced-internalized false confessions. Kassin (1997) asserts that they all have two factors in common, namely: (a) a suspect who is vulnerable, e.g., one whose memory is malleable by virtue of his/her youth, interpersonal trust, naivete, suggestibility, lack of intelligence, stress. Fatigue, alcohol, or drug use, and (b) the presentation of false evidence such as a rigged polygraph or other forensic tests (e.g., bloodstains, semen, hair, fingerprints), ________________________ 23 Leo, R. A. (1996b), Law and Society Review, 30, 259-288, Miranda’s Revenge: Police Interrogation as Confidence Game. 24 Leo, R.A. (1996c), The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 86, 621-692, The Impact of Miranda Revisited. 25 Kassin, 1997; Kassin & Kiechel, 1996; Kassin & Sukelo, 1997; Kassin & Wrightsman, 1985; Wrightsman & Kassin, 1993. Serapio 8 statements supposedly made by an accomplice, or a staged eyewitness identification as a way to convince the beleaguered suspect that he or she is guilty. (p. 227)26 In view of all these studies, Eysenck (1964) concurs with Gudjonsson that innocent suspects that have certain personalities and characteristics are also more prone to suggestibility, and are thus more likely to give false statements and confess to crimes that they did not commit. According to Eysenck, introverts are capable of being conditioned more easily than extroverts. Since most criminals are extroverts, the methods of interrogation that are designed to effectively deal with the typical extrovert criminal may have an overwhelming impact on a suspect who is an easily-conditionable introvert.27 According to Perske (1994), children, the mentally retarded, and the feeble minded perhaps individuals who are exceptionally introverted, as in the case of Delbert Ward (Wecht, 1994), are also at risk. 28 Evidently the most at risk are those with a certain amount of stress applied to a normal person may get the truth out of him or her; but if a lot of stress is applied to the psychologycally inadequate, the result could likely be a false confession. ________________________ 26 Kassin (1997), p. 227 27 Eysenck, H.J. (1964). Crime and Personality, London: Routledge 28 Perske,R. (1994), Mental Retardation, 32, 377-380, Thoughts on the Police Interrogation of Individuals with Mental Retardation. References Conti, Richard, The Journal of Credibility Assessment and Witness Psychology, 1999, Vol.2, No. 1,Published by the Department of Psychology of Boise State University, The Psyholology of False Confessions. Drizin, Steven, Legal Director of the on Wrongful Convictions, Northwestern, Psychological Interrogation Tactics Can Lead To False Confessions,Updated 10:35 a.m. PT, Tue., May 1, 2007 Eysenck, H.J. (1964). Crime and Personality, London: Routledge Gutang vs. People, G.R. 135406, July 11, 2000, 129 SCAD 433 Gudjonsson, G.H., 1992, New York: Wiley, The Psychology of Interrogations, Confessions, and Testimony. Gudjonsson G.H., & Mackeith, J.A.C. 1990, Medicine Science and the Law, 30, 329-335, A Proven Case of False Confession: Psychological Aspects. Gudjonsson, G.H., 1991, In J.F. Schumaker (Ed), Human Suggestaibility: Advances in Theory, research and application 9pp. 279-288)., New York: Routledge, The Application of Interrogative Suggestability to Police Interviewing. Inbau, F.E., Reid, J.E. (1962), Criminal Interrogation and Confessions (3rd ed.) (A) Baltimore, M.D.:Williams and Wilkins. Innocence Project, Understand the Causes: False Confessions Kassin, S.M., Gudjononsson, G.H, Scientific American, may 19, 2005, True Crimes, False Confessions, Why Do People Confess To Crimes They Did Not Commit? Kassin, S.M., & Wrightman, L.S. 1985, Comfession Evidence, In S.M. Kassin and L.S. Writghtman (Eds), The Psychology of Evidence and Trial Procedure (pp. 67-94). Beverly Hills: Sage Kassin,S.M. ( 1997), American Psychologist, 52, 221-233, The Psychology of Confession Evidence. Leo, R. A. (1996b), Law and Society Review, 30, 259-288, Miranda’s Revenge: Police Interrogation as Confidence Game. Leo, R.A. (1996c), The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 86, 621-692, The Impact of Miranda Revisited. Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 U.S., 448 Montaldo, C., Why Innocent People Make False Confessions? People vs. Malimit, 246 SCRA 167, (1996) People vs. Encipido, 146 SCRA 478 (1986); People vs. Domondon, 43 SCRA 486 (1972); People vs. Sta Maria 15 SCRA 222 (1965) Perske,R. (1994), Mental Retardation, 32, 377-380, Thoughts on the Police Interrogation of Individuals with Mental Retardation. Rattner, A., & Sagarin, E., (1996), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, Convicted but Innocent: Wrongful Conviction and Public Policy Revised Penal Code , Art. III Sec 12(1) Rules of Court, Rule 130 Sec 26. Rules of Court, Rule 130, Sec 33, People vs. Calvo, Jr., 269 SCRA 676 Wakefield, Hollida, M.A., Underwager, Ralph, Ph.D., Library Resources, Coerced or Nonvoluntary Confessions Read More