Perceptions of children during a police interrogation: Guilt,confessions, and interview fairness

Abstract

Jurors are often provided with confession evidence and must determine whether the confession was true, false, coerced, or voluntary. As more juveniles are tried in adult criminal court, jurors must increasingly make these determinations about minors’ statements. In this study, mock jurors read an actual interrogation of a child suspect that included confession evidence, and then provided judgments regarding the coerciveness of the interrogation, the child's and police's knowledge and behaviors, and guilt. Child age (11 versus 14 years) and gender were manipulated and examined in relation to participant gender and pre-existing sympathy levels for juvenile offenders. Factors external to the suspect – participant gender and sympathy for juvenile offenders – interacted with child suspect factors to influence perceptions of the child, the interrogation, and guilt. When multiple factors were considered, perceptions of suspect credibility and police fairness were the strongest predictors of guilt and perceived culpability. The findings have implications for decision-making in cases involving juvenile defendants and confession evidence.     

促使犯罪嫌疑人态度改变的讯问心理策略

讯问的心理实质是促使犯罪嫌疑人由拒供、谎供到真实供述的态度改变过程。影响犯罪嫌疑人态度改变的因素有认知性因素,情绪情感因素,情景因素,犯罪嫌疑人的人格特征。促使犯罪嫌疑人态度改变的心理策略有,正确利用恐惧唤醒,恰当使用单面或双面证据,合理利用首因与近因效应,有效组织不同层次的说服信息,建立与犯罪嫌疑人的可沟通的关系,设计讯问场所与营造讯问气氛。     

Perceptions of coercion in interrogation: comparing expert and lay opinions

ABSTRACT

When confessions are entered into evidence in criminal courts, issues of coercion and voluntariness are important and often contested matters. Occasionally, defense attorneys proffer expert witnesses to testify about the coercive pressures of an interrogation and the risk of a false confession. Such testimony is often ruled inadmissible on the grounds that it does not inform the jury beyond its common knowledge. In our effort to test this judicial assumption about common knowledge, we surveyed jury-eligible laypeople (n?=?67) and social scientists specializing in interrogation and confessions (n?=?54) regarding their opinions about the coerciveness of prohibited interrogation tactics, maximization techniques, minimization techniques, and suspect risk factors and compared their ratings with a set of independent t tests. Laypeople gave lower ratings to the coerciveness of all sets of items representing interrogation techniques, and lower ratings to the vulnerabilities associated with suspect risk factors, as compared to social science experts. The disparities between laypeople’s and experts’ perceptions of coercion in interrogations demonstrate that such issues are not fully within the common knowledge of prospective jurors, and suggest the need to provide jurors with expert witness guidance when tasked with evaluating confession evidence.     

Police interrogation practice in Slovenia

Interrogation techniques are well explored, but in Slovenia it has remained unknown what interrogation techniques are used and what the basic characteristics of suspect interrogations are. The Slovenian interrogation manual proposes some coercive interrogation techniques and neglects their weaknesses. The aim of the current study was to examine Slovenian police officers’ beliefs as to the basic characteristics of their interrogations and whether techniques proposed by the manual are used in practice to begin to provide some insight into what actually happens in such interrogations. A survey instrument was used to obtain self-report data from a sample of criminal investigators. From 86 completed questionnaires it was found that a typical interrogation of a suspect lasts around 90 minutes and is not recorded. Interviewers typically use three interrogation techniques namely (i) conducting interrogations in isolation; (ii) identifying contradictions in the suspect's story; and (iii) confronting the suspect with evidence. Findings suggest that some coercive interrogation techniques are used in practice (e.g. offering moral justifications, alluding to have evidence of guilt, good cop/bad cop routine, and minimization). The study is the first insight into the practices of Slovenian investigators when questioning suspects. Differences among general, white-collar and organized crime investigators are also discussed.     

Perceptions of suspect statements: a comparison of exposed lies and confessions

Confrontational interrogation techniques seek to produce a confession, while investigative interviews focus on information gathering and/or catching suspects in lies. Confessions obtained during interrogations are potent for securing a defendant’s conviction. However, the goal of investigative interviews is not to produce a confession, yet it is unknown if their outcome (e.g. exposed lies) is as effective in court as that of an interrogation (i.e. a confession). In two studies, mock jurors read case summaries wherein a defendant was accused of murder and terrorist activities. In both cases, the statement a defendant made during a police interview was manipulated: The defendant either lied or not and either confessed or not. Participants then rendered a verdict and were asked about the probative value of several pieces of supporting evidence. Results were similar across both studies with more convictions when the defendant lied, confessed, or did both relative to when the defendant produced a statement without lies and without a confession. Furthermore, we found that perceptions of supporting evidence mediated the effect of exposed lies on culpability, but this was not the case for confessions. These findings illustrate the positive qualities of presenting exposed lies in court, diminishing the need for a confession.     

The Central Park Jogger Case-Police Coercion and Secrecy in Interrogation

Abstract

The prosecution and recent legal reversals in the New York “Central Park Jogger” case are discussed with a focus on the preoccupation with crime in US society and concerns regarding racial discrimination in the legal system. It is argued that the inherently coercive nature of interrogation, and the secrecy that surrounds custodial interrogation, create conditions that are ripe for abusive treatment. The phenomenon of false confession is presented and discussed with regard to the Central Park Jogger and other cases. The author advocates the recording and preservation of the entire period of custodial questioning so that there is an objective record of the interrogation methods that lead to “confession” statements.     

Jurors’ reactions to recanted confessions: Do the defendant's personal and dispositional characteristics play a role?

Abstract

Confession evidence presented at trial is extremely damaging to the defense. This study examines the impact of a recanted confession on jurors’ perceptions of a murder case in which the defendant claimed to have falsely confessed due either to an underlying medical condition, a psychological disorder, or the general stress of the interrogation. Also included were an inadmissible confession condition and a no-confession control condition. Results showed that the impact of the confession was mediated in part by the circumstances surrounding it. Although probability-of-commission estimates were as high in all of the conditions involving a confession, conviction rates were marginally higher when the disputed confession involved mental illness or interrogation-induced stress than when there was no confession, yet did not differ when the disputed confession involved a medical disorder or there was no confession. These findings show that not all recanted confessions are treated equally and that people selectively discount confessions depending on biases and beliefs they hold.     

论德国刑事诉讼中的禁止欺骗性讯问规则——兼论我国禁止“欺骗取证”规定在侦讯中的适用

借助司法裁判的方式，德国对何为刑事诉讼法禁止的欺骗性讯问发展出了一些判断标准。这些判断标准对解决禁止“欺骗取证”规定在我国侦讯中的适用问题具有一定的借鉴价值。在我国刑事诉讼法已确立不得强迫自证己罪原则，增强对犯罪嫌疑人口供自愿性保护的背景下，我国司法实务界应借鉴德国经验的合理内核，确立判明禁止的欺骗性讯问的基准，以指引侦查人员以合法的方式开展侦讯活动。     

Problems in expert deception detection and the risk of false confessions: no proof to the contrary in Levine et al. (2014)

Lie-detection research has shown that observers who rely on nonverbal cues or on verbal cues correctly classify on average 54% of truth tellers and liars. In addition, over the years, countless numbers of innocent people have made false confessions and, in analysing the problem, researchers have implicated both a suspect's vulnerability and the persuasive influence of certain police interrogation tactics. Levine et al. (2014) aim to contribute to these vast bodies of literature by reporting two studies purportedly showing that expert interviewers – when they are permitted to question interviewees – can achieve almost perfect accuracy without eliciting false confessions. We argue that theoretical and methodological aspects of these studies undermine the reliability and validity of the data reported, that as a result the studies do not contribute to the scientific literatures on lie detection and false confessions in any meaningful way, and that the results are dangerously misleading.     

Do Jurors “Know” What Isn’t So About Child Witnesses?

Are expert witnesses needed in child sexual abuse cases to educate jurors about children’s memory, suggestibility, and reactions to abuse, or do jurors already know what such experts could tell them? To cast light on this question, we surveyed jurors and jury-eligible college students and compared their beliefs with what is known via scientific research regarding children’s memory and ability to testify, reactions to interrogation, and reactions to sexual abuse. We also asked participants to infer results of four widely cited studies of children’s suggestibility. Participants’ beliefs were consistent with findings from research on some issues (e.g., that children can be led to claim that false events occurred) but diverged from the scientific consensus on other issues (e.g., whether children can remember painful events in infancy). Similarly, participants sometimes overestimated and sometimes underestimated the level of suggestibility observed in empirical studies. Individual differences in accuracy were related to participants’ gender, education and ethnicity, and there was considerable disagreement among participants on many questions. Implications of findings for the admissibility of expert testimony in child abuse cases are discussed.     

Inside Interrogation: The Lie,The Bluff,and False Confessions

Using a less deceptive variant of the false evidence ploy, interrogators often use the bluff tactic, whereby they pretend to have evidence to be tested without further claiming that it necessarily implicates the suspect. Three experiments were conducted to assess the impact of the bluff on confession rates. Using the Kassin and Kiechel (Psychol Sci 7:125–128, 1996) computer crash paradigm, Experiment 1 indicated that bluffing increases false confessions comparable to the effect produced by the presentation of false evidence. Experiment 2 replicated the bluff effect and provided self-reports indicating that innocent participants saw the bluff as a promise of future exoneration which, paradoxically, made it easier to confess. Using a variant of the Russano et al. (Psychol Sci 16:481–486, 2005) cheating paradigm, Experiment 3 replicated the bluff effect on innocent suspects once again, though a ceiling effect was obtained in the guilty condition. Results suggest that the phenomenology of innocence can lead innocents to confess even in response to relatively benign interrogation tactics.     

Taking the bait: interrogation questions about hypothetical evidence may inflate perceptions of guilt

ABSTRACT

During suspect interviews, police will sometimes ask about hypothetical incriminating evidence to evoke a cue to deception – a technique known as a bait question. Previous research has demonstrated such questions can distort peoples’ memory for what evidence exists in a case. Here, we investigate whether such memory distortion can also cause people to see the suspect as more likely to be guilty. Across three experiments, we find exposure to bait questions led to participants hold inflated views of a suspect’s guilt. Further, we demonstrate bait questions cause reliable, robust memory distortion, leading participants to believe non-existent, incriminating evidence exists. However, we found no evidence to support the speculated mechanisms for this inflation – namely, (1) that source monitoring errors could lead people to misremember false evidence as real evidence and (2) that bait questions provide ‘key evidence’ to fill in the gaps of an incomplete theory of a case. In sum, bait questions have the problematic potential to shift jurors towards guilty verdicts. We suggest future research directions on bait questions, including the need for different designs to clarify why bait questions inflate guilt, and recommend practitioners avoid the use of bait questions.     

Knowing when the camera lies: Judicial instructions mitigate the camera perspective bias

Purpose. Videotaped confession evidence elicits harsher evaluations against a defendant if initially recorded with the camera focused primarily on the suspect, compared with other presentation formats. Unfortunately, most videotaped confession evidence employs this biasing suspect‐focus camera perspective format, leaving defendants with no recourse. The present study examined the utility of judicial instructions in mitigating the effects of the camera perspective bias on individual juror verdicts. Methods. Through random assignment, 156 mock jurors did or did not receive explicit instructions to correct for the camera perspective bias prior to viewing a video recording of an authentic true or false confession. Results. As expected, mock jurors who received instructions to correct for the camera perspective bias reported more lenient judgments of confessor guilt after viewing a suspect‐focus confession recording compared to those who did not receive such instructions. However, this relative leniency emerged only in response to false, and not true, confessions. Conclusions. Results demonstrated that judicial instructions used in the present research mitigated the effect of camera perspective on mock‐juror judgments of suspect guilt.     

Legal Decisions of Preadolescent and Adolescent Defendants: Predictors of Confessions,Pleas, Communication with Attorneys,and Appeals

While there is an increasing recognition that developmental differences may exist in legal decision-making, little research has examined this. This study examined the legal judgments of 152 defendants aged 11–17 (73 females, 79 males). Adolescents aged 15 and younger were more likely than older adolescents to confess and waive their right to counsel, and less likely to report that they would appeal their case or discuss disagreements with their attorneys. Also, while adolescents aged 15–17 were more likely to confess, plead guilty, and accept a plea bargain if they perceived that there was strong evidence against them, younger defendants’ legal decisions were not predicted by the strength of evidence. Importantly, defendants with poor legal abilities were more likely to waive legal protections, such as the right to counsel and to appeal. Defendants from below-average socioeconomic backgrounds were more likely to waive their interrogation rights, and defendants from ethnic minority groups were less likely to report that they would disclose information to their attorneys. The advice of attorneys, parents, and peers emerged as important predictors of plea decisions. None of the defendants reported that their parents advised them to assert the right to silence during police interrogation.     

庭外供述笔录的非自愿性推定原则 --解决刑讯逼供问题的一种立法思路

刑事被告人的庭外供述笔录,也就是侦查人员在剥夺被告人人身自由的情况下所获取的有罪供述笔录,由于讯问过程的秘密性、封闭性和天然强制性,因此应一律被推定为非自愿的言辞证据.除非检控方能够提出证据证明其自愿性,否则,庭外供述笔录应一律被推定为非法的和不可采的证据,刑事法庭既不得准许检控方在法庭上提出该类证据,更不得将其作为定案的根据.经过这种证明责任倒置的技术性改革,侦查人员是否采取刑讯逼供的问题就可以转化成为庭外供述笔录是否具有自愿性和可采性的程序问题.     

Increasing pressure does not benefit lie detection: a reply to Ten Brinke et al. (2015)

When passively attending to suspects, observers are poor at distinguishing lies from truths. Deception research has therefore shifted to examining interview styles aimed at eliciting and enhancing deception cues. Based upon a literature review and three empirical studies, ten Brinke, L., Khambatta, P., and Carney, D. R. [2015. Physically scarce (vs. enriched) environments decrease the ability to successfully tell lies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144, 982–992. doi:10.1037/xge0000103] recommend increasing pressure on interviewees as it would increase lie detection accuracy. In this comment, we argue that these authors (1) misinterpret the literature when concluding that lie detection benefits from increasing pressure on interviewees, and (2) their data do not show that lie detection is more accurate when pressure is increased. In absence of such data, we recommend that increasing pressure on interviewees should be avoided: it hampers the elicitation of valuable information and can lead to false confessions.     

讯问辅助方法在转化讯问对象拒供动机中的功能

讯问对象的拒供动机是形成“讯问难”的重要因素。讯问对象的拒供动机形成因素主要来自于讯问人员和讯问对象自身两个方面;按照常态和变态心理因素分为现实性拒供动机和心理拒供动机。侦查讯问辅助方法在转化讯问现实性拒供动机的功能在于减弱讯问对象拒供的心理需要,明确或强化其供述需求,提供诱因,创设有利于讯问对象形成供述决意的情境;在转化心理拒供动机中的功能在于利用讯问对象心理病态特征,刺激讯问对象的挫折情绪,突破忍耐极限,导致心理崩溃,从而走向供述。