Wrongful convictions and claims of false or misleading forensic evidence

The results are reported of a study to examine case factors associated with 732 wrongful convictions classified by the National Registry of Exonerations as being associated with “False or Misleading Forensic Evidence.” A forensic error typology has been developed to provide a structure for the categorization and coding of factors relating to misstatements in forensic science reports; errors of individualization or classification; testimony errors; issues relating to trials and officers of the court; and evidence handling and reporting issues. This study, which included the analysis of 1391 forensic examinations, demonstrates that most errors related to forensic evidence are not identification or classification errors by forensic scientists. When such errors are made, they are frequently associated with incompetent or fraudulent examiners, disciplines with an inadequate scientific foundation, or organizational deficiencies in training, management, governance, or resources. More often, forensic reports or testimony miscommunicate results, do not conform to established standards, or fail to provide appropriate limiting information. Just as importantly, actors within the broader criminal justice system—but not under the purview of any forensic science organization—may contribute to errors that may be related to the forensic evidence. System issues include reliance on presumptive tests without confirmation by a forensic laboratory, use of independent experts outside the administrative control of public laboratories, inadequate defense, and suppression or misrepresentation of forensic evidence by investigators or prosecutors. In approximately half of wrongful convictions analyzed, improved technology, testimony standards, or practice standards may have prevented a wrongful conviction at the time of trial.     

Officials' Estimates of the Incidence of “Actual Innocence” Convictions

Evidence indicates that the conviction and imprisonment of factually innocent persons occur with some regularity. Most research focuses on causes, but the incidence of wrongful convictions is an important scientific and policy issue, especially as no official body gathers data on miscarriages of justice. Two methods are available for discovering the incidence of wrongful conviction: (1) enumerating specific cases and (2) having criminal justice experts estimate its incidence. Counts or catalogues of wrongful conviction necessarily undercount its incidence and are subject to accuracy challenges. We surveyed Michigan criminal justice officials, replicating a recent Ohio survey, to obtain an expert estimate of the incidence of wrongful conviction. All groups combined estimated that wrongful convictions occurred at a rate of less than ½ percent in their own jurisdiction and at a rate of 1–3 percent in the United States. Defense lawyers estimate higher rates of wrongful conviction than judges, who estimate higher rates than police officials and prosecutors. These differences may be explained by professional socialization. An overall wrongful conviction estimate of ½ percent extrapolates to about 5,000 wrongful felony convictions and the imprisonment of more than 2,000 innocent persons in the United States every year.     

Criminal Justice Reform,Monetary Incentives,and Policy Evaluation*

Innovation in criminal justice frequently fails, or is perceived as having failed. In this paper we look at a highly imaginative, quintessential 1980's innovation–the use of financial incentives to encourage prosecutors to process more quickly their oldest cases and their cases involving defendants incarcerated pre-trial. Measured by conventional “bottom line” criteria the incentive scheme can be labeled a failure. But measured both by the limited actual success at least one office achieved, and by the general effectiveness of the incentives as motivators for three out of the four offices studied, a somewhat more positive assessment of the efficacy of incentives can be fashioned.     

刑事错案形成的心理原因

刑事错案的成因包括直接原因、环境原因和心理原因,其中心理原因(主要表现为包括"遂道视野"、"证实偏差"等在内的各种心理偏差)对错案的形成有更根本的影响。绝大多数直接原因,如刑讯逼供、隐瞒有利于犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的证据、忽视辩护律师的合理意见等等,都是各种心理偏差的外在表现。而绝大多数环境原因,如不合理的考核方式、司法经费不足等等,之所以会导致错案,主要是因为它们强化了这些心理偏差。根据这些心理偏差对错案形成的可能影响,可以在心理学层面总结出刑事错案的形成过程及规律,而我国近年来纠正的22起刑事错案可以为此提供验证。我国有必要完善当前的刑事司法体制,以减少这些心理偏差对办案人员的影响,进而更有效地防止错案的发生。     

The AFSP Standard - a lesson for law enforcement agencies

Compliance with the AFSP (Association of Forensic Science Providers) Standard [1] which concerns the formulation of an evaluative opinion requires consideration of the defence case. This can be problematic for forensic scientists working with or for law enforcement agencies. Among the aims of law enforcement agencies is to secure a conviction while in many jurisdictions the forensic scientist owes an overriding duty to the Court. This casework report demonstrates that early consideration of the defence case by a forensic scientist complying with the AFSP Standard may help rather than hinder the prosecution. The dichotomy as to a conflict of interest for the scientist between supporting the police/prosecutors and being scientifically objective is shown to be a false dichotomy. Compliance with the Standard ensures that science is a better servant of justice.     

Prosecutor Risk,Maturation, and Wrongful Conviction Practice

In this article we rethink the connection between prosecutorial experience and conviction psychology that undergirds much of the academic literature about wrongful convictions. The conviction psychology account of prosecutorial behavior asserts that prosecutorial susceptibility to cognitive biases deepens over time, thereby increasing the risk that prosecutors will become involved in wrongful convictions the longer they stay in the profession. Our interviews with more than 200 state prosecutors call into question the basis for this asserted correlation between prosecutorial experience and risk of misconduct. The prosecutors we met consistently reported that, all else equal, prosecutors tend to become more balanced, rather than more adversarial, over time. Hence, the prosecutors who present the greatest risk of producing a wrongful conviction are those who are either inexperienced or resistant to the normal maturation process. For this reason, we suggest that wrongful conviction researchers and database designers pay closer attention to the variables associated with prosecutorial experience and resistance that might affect the development of prosecutorial maturity and the consequent risk of wrongful convictions.     

Estimating wrongful convictions

Although numerous cases of wrongful convictions have been documented in the literature and in the media, criminologists have yet to devise a methodology for estimating the extent of such errors in the criminal justice system. I explore several methodologies with this purpose in mind, including the use of official data, inmates' self-reports, and case study approaches. Specifically, I use court-ordered discharges from imprisonment as a basis for measuring official error. In addition, I employ data from the RAND inmate surveys to estimate the extent of convicted offenders who deny their commitment offenses. Studies that attempt to catalogue individual wrongful convictions also serve as a basis for estimating false positive errors. Each methodology has its own limitations, but by employing multiple measures and approaches, I make possible an estimate of the “dark figure” of wrongful convictions.     

THE LANGUAGE OF STIGMATIZATION AND THE MARK OF VIOLENCE: EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE ON THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF CRIMINAL RECORD STIGMA

After years of stagnation, labeling theory has recently gained new empirical support. Simultaneously, new policy initiatives have attempted to restructure criminal record stigma to reduce reintegration barriers, and subsequent recidivism, driven by labeling. For example, in a recent Department of Justice (DOJ) language policy, person‐first terms (e.g., “person with a conviction”) were substituted for crime‐first terms (e.g., “offender”). The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has also issued guidelines to structure how decision‐makers use criminal records. Unfortunately, little is currently known about the social construction and use of criminal record stigma or the potential effects of such policy changes. In the current study, we provide two unique empirical tests. In study 1, we examine the social construction of stigma by testing DOJ's language policy with experimental data from a nationally representative sample of American adults (N = 996). In study 2, we use a separate nationwide experiment (N = 1,540) to examine how the contextualization of criminal records influences social exclusion decisions. Across both studies, we find consistent evidence of a “mark of violence.” The public perceives that individuals with violent convictions are the most likely to commit future crimes, and it is more supportive of excluding these individuals from employment. Crime‐first terms exacerbate perceived recidivism risk for individuals with violent convictions.     

Do you get what you pay for? Type of counsel and its effect on criminal court outcomes

Although the Sixth Amendment of the constitution guarantees assistance of counsel to indigent criminal defendants, questions exist about the quality of this representation. Critics assert that ‘you get what you pay for’ and that public defenders are less effective than privately retained counsel regarding criminal justice outcomes. Some research, however, reveals that public defenders are as effective as privately retained counsel because of their working relationships with prosecutors and judges, the so-called courtroom workgroup. The current study tested the assertion that ‘you get what you pay for’ by examining the effect of type of counsel (public defenders versus private attorneys) on four different case processing outcomes for a large mid-western jurisdiction. Results generally show that type of counsel has no significant direct effect. Tests for interaction, however, suggest that for some defendants, type of counsel interacts with other key variables to influence certain outcomes.     

The Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner and the Successful Sexual Assault Prosecution

In recent years, specialized nursing skills have proliferated. On the leading edge of this phenomenon are sexual assault nurse examiners (SANEs). This article, and its supporting research, examines the relationship between the SANE, the prosecutor's office, and the disposition of sexual assault cases in Texas. All prosecutors in this highly populous state were surveyed regarding their perceptions of the contributions of SANEs to the criminal justice process. Sexual assault cases present at each stage of prosecution unique obstacles to conviction, as thoroughly explored in other publications. The gauntlet of trial is intimidating to many, if not all, of the victims of this offense. Attempts to protect the victim from unnecessary and irrelevant personal attacks have been somewhat successful. SANEs, invariably volunteers with specialized forensic training, provide professional evidence collection and continuity of support for victims and are a pragmatic innovation in criminal justice. In this article, their role is examined through the lens of the prosecutors, the criminal justice officials most significant and influential in determining the ultimate resolution of complaints filed by victims of crime. The officials polled expressed great confidence in the abilities, commitment, and overall contribution of SANEs at each phase of the process, including trial. The progress and impact of this forensic specialization in gaining judicial recognition as an expert witness is also examined.     

中国刑事专家辅助人向专家证人的角色转变

中国的刑事专家辅助人具有既类似于律师又类似于鉴定人、证人的多重属性;围绕专家辅助人意见的性质,也形成了质证方式说、鉴定意见说、证人证言说等多种观点。角色定位上的混乱,不仅造成了独具特色的鉴定人与专家辅助人的双轨制,而且常常使专家辅助人意见的法庭采信陷入困境。从最高人民法院有关专家辅助人的新近规定看,专家辅助人的角色呈现出向专家证人转变的趋势。这种转变的核心要求,一是实现鉴定人和专家辅助人的诉讼地位平等,专家辅助人意见和鉴定意见在专家证言意义上的证据效力平等;二是使专家辅助人回归专家证人本色,将强加给专家辅助人的不合理的质证职责交还给律师、检察官;三是提高律师、检察官熟练运用交叉询问规则、对科学证据进行质证的能力,充分发挥法官的科学证据“守门人”作用,以适应事实认定科学化的需要。     

Limitations on the ability to negotiate justice: attorney perspectives on guilt,innocence, and legal advice in the current plea system

In the American criminal justice system the vast majority of criminal convictions occur as the result of guilty pleas, often made as a result of plea bargains, rather than jury trials. The incentives offered in exchange for guilty pleas mean that both innocent and guilty defendants plead guilty. We investigate the role of attorneys in this context, through interviews with criminal defense attorneys. We examine defense attorney perspectives on the extent to which innocent defendants are (and should be) pleading guilty in the current legal framework and investigate their views of their own role in this complex system. We also use a hypothetical case to probe the ways in which defense attorneys consider guilt or innocence when providing advice on pleas. Results indicate that attorney advice is influenced by guilt or innocence, but also that attorneys are limited in the extent to which they can negotiate justice for their clients in a system in which uncertainty and large discrepancies between outcomes of guilty pleas and conviction at trial can make it a sensible option to plead guilty even when innocent. Results also suggest conflicting opinions over the role of the attorney in the plea-bargaining process.     

Guilty Pleas in an Inquisitorial Setting – An Empirical Study of France

Anglo‐American guilty pleas have inspired criminal justice reformers in many inquisitorially based systems in recent years, in response to caseload pressures. In France, two different procedures based on the defendant's confession were introduced in 1999 and 2004 respectively: an out‐of‐court disposal (the composition pénale) and a prosecution pathway (the comparution sur reconnaissance préalable de culpabilité). Basing its analysis upon direct observations and interviews with French public prosecutors, this article examines the impact of these procedures on the French criminal justice system and its actors. Rather than a move from an inquisitorial to a more adversarial system, data collected for this study show a bureaucratization of the French criminal justice process. The role of public prosecutors is changing from that of judicial officers to caseload managers who have delegated part of their workload to less qualified staff for efficiency purposes.     

Self-Reported and Official Offending from Age 10 to Age 56

In the Cambridge Study in Delinquent Development, over 400 London males have been followed up from age 8 to age 48 in face-to-face interviews and up to age 56 in criminal records. About 42 % of the males were convicted up to age 56. During five age ranges up to age 47, 94 % of the males admitted at least one of eight offenses, in comparison with 31 % who were convicted for at least one of these offenses in these age ranges. The prevalence of offending, and the number of offenses committed, decreased steadily after age 18 according to both convictions and self-reports. On average, there were 38 self-reported offenses per conviction, and this ratio also decreased with age. Convicted males self-reported 25 offenses per conviction on average. It is concluded that the “scaling-up factor” from convictions to self-reported offenses is very important, especially in evaluating the effectiveness of intervention programs.     

Prosecutorial Discretion: An Examination of Substantial Assistance Departures in Federal Crack‐Cocaine and Powder‐Cocaine Cases

Recently there has been a call for research that explores decision‐making at stages prior to sentencing in the criminal justice process. Particularly research is needed under a determinate sentencing system where judicial dispositions are usually restricted by guidelines, which increases the importance of earlier decision‐making stages. As an answer to this call, and in an attempt to build on currents studies on the effects of departures as an intervening mechanism, and a source of unwarranted disparity, this study explores federal sentencing data on offenders convicted of crack‐cocaine and powder‐cocaine offenses. Although decision‐making of all criminal justice actors generally, and prosecutors specifically, has been the subject of much research, studies have yet to resolve the nature and outcome of their “autonomous” discretion. This autonomy becomes especially salient regarding prosecutorial decisions for substantial assistance departures. In deciding who receives a substantial assistance departure, the prosecutor has carte blanche power.     

A comparative analysis of conviction outcomes of American domestic terrorists

This research uses quantitative analyses to determine whether or not conviction outcomes differ across three major American domestic terrorism groups: ecoterrorists, left-wing extremists, and right-wing extremists. Findings suggest that ecoterrorists receive lighter treatment within the criminal justice system while controlling for important variables, such as gender, age, and count severity. Findings highlight differences between “home-grown” terrorist groups, departing from a large segment of terrorism research focused on domestic versus international comparisons or terrorist versus civilian comparisons. Results elicit new research questions to understand why domestic terrorists receive differential treatment within the criminal justice system, despite controlling for key variables.     

INTERORGANIZATIONAL UTILITY OF WELFARE STIGMA IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM*

The appropriation of “welfare stigma” or stereotypes about poor people's overreliance and abuse of public aid in two core criminal justice functions is examined: felony adjudication in a court system and space allocation in a jail. Through a comparative ethnographic study in which an abductive analysis of data (20 months of fieldwork) was used, we show that criminal justice gatekeepers utilize welfare stigma to create stricter eligibility criteria for due process in criminal courts and occupancy in jails. Specifically, the number of court appearances, motions, trials, jail beds, food, showers, and medical services is considered by professionals to be the benefits that individuals seek to access and abuse. Professionals view their role as preventing (rather than granting) access to these resources. The comparative nature of our data reveals that welfare stigma has interorganizational utility by serving two different organizational goals: It streamlines convictions in courts, which pulls defendants through adjudication, and conversely, it expands early release from jails, which pulls inmates out of the custody population. In the context of diminishing social safety nets, our findings have implications for understanding how discretion is exercised in an American criminal justice system increasingly tasked with the distribution of social services to the urban poor.     

Advancing Wrongful Conviction Scholarship: Toward New Conceptual Frameworks

As wrongful conviction scholarship grows, some scholars have suggested that existing research on miscarriages of justice lacks theoretical grounding and methodological sophistication, arguing that the use of social science theory may help to better understand wrongful convictions. In this article, we suggest that it may be useful to draw upon conceptual frameworks found in traditional criminal justice studies, discuss what such approaches might suggest about miscarriages of justice, and begin to explore the questions or topics they may encourage interested researchers to pursue. Furthermore, through this broad theoretical lens, we can see that criminal justice theory is present, at least implicitly, in some existing innocence literature, and that making such theoretical connections more explicit may help to move the study of wrongful conviction into the mainstream of criminal justice research.     

A PROSPECTIVE TEST OF A CRIMINAL CAREER MODEL*

In an earlier article in this journal, Barnett, Blumstein, and Farrington (1987) formulated a model that described the criminal careers of the multiple offenders in a cohort of London males that had been studied from their 10th to 25th birthdays. That model involved two subpopulations of offenders (denoted as “frequents” and “occasionals”), each characterized by a constant annual conviction rate (μ) and a constant probability (p) of terminating the career following a conviction. This article describes the results of a prospective and predictive test of the model using new data collected on the same offenders from their 25th to 30th birthdays. The original model accurately predicted the number of recidivists, the degree of recidivism risk, the total number of recidivist convictions, and the time intervals between recidivist convictions. However, the predictions for the frequents suffered some distortions introduced by a few “intermittent” offenders who seemed to have terminated their careers, but who re-initiated offending during the test period after a long gap.     

Iron triangle of the gong jian fa: Lessons from wrongful convictions in capital cases?

This article examines the iron triangle of the gong jian fa (police, prosecutors and courts) in China, based on Chinese lessons from high-profile wrongful convictions in capital cases. It argues that the iron triangle acts as both an administrative and a political control on such cases, behind which lies overly close cooperation between the three state institutions. This cooperation often results from coordination by local political-legal committees (PLCs). Under this institutional environment, the police, prosecutors and courts have to work together and cooperate with combating crime, without necessary restricts to ensure criminal justice even in capital cases. Responding to repeated occurrences of such typical injustices, China has promoted several waves of justice reforms to prevent and reduce wrongful convictions over the last ten years, but has failed to make substantive progress without effectively addressing the iron triangle. This continued failure calls for a holistic approach to future systemic reform. Particularly, specific measures are required to enhance judicial independence and to reduce intervention from local PLCs during the handling of individual cases. Such reforms would greatly reduce the risk of wrongful convictions in capital cases.