Legal Psychology - Evidence Gathering Tutorial 2024 PDF

Legal psychology – evidence gathering Legal psychology Legal Psychology Law psychology AIMS OF LEGAL PS...

Legal psychology – evidence gathering Legal psychology Legal Psychology Law psychology AIMS OF LEGAL PSYCHOLOGY Enhance the scientific Investigate the validity of Contribute to the understanding of psychological operation of agencies of psychological aspects of assumptions underlying law (police, penal system, the functioning of the legal material law courts, …) system Reliability and validity Police interviewing Interrogation (e.g., USA) Focus on establishing control Closed, confirmatory questions Confession-oriented Use of psychological manipulation Focus on anxiety cues for detecting deception Investigative interviewing (e.g., the Netherlands, UK) Focus on establishing rapport Open-ended, explanatory questions Focus on gathering information Direct and positive confrontation style Focus on cognitive cues to detect deception An example… PO: Good afternoon, Mr. Smith. I’m Officer Johnson, and I’ll be asking you a few questions today. First, I want to remind you that you are not obligated to say anything, but anything you do say may be used as eidence. Do you understand your rights? S: Yeah, I understand. PO: Good. We’re here because there’s been an incident involving theft at the downtown electronics store on September 5th. Can you tell me where you were on that date? S: I don’t remember. It was a while ago. PO: Take your time. Try to think back to that day. Anything you can recall might help. S: Uhm, I think I was home. Yeah, I must have been home. PO: That’s fine. Can you recall if anyone was with you or if you left home at all that day? S: No, I don’t think so. I was just at home. PO: Okay. If anything comes back to you later, just let us know. An example… PO: We’ve checked the surveillance footage from the store, and there’s someone who looks a lot like you walking near the shop that day. Are you sure you were at home? S: What? No, I wasn’t there. That’s not me. PO: Look, the footage is pretty clear, and it matches your description. It’s okay if you just forgot, but if you did go out that day, you should tell us now. S: No, it wasn’t me! I wasn’t near that store! PO: I understand, but let’s say you were walking near the shop. Maybe you went inside without realizing how much trouble this could get you in. People make mistakes. Were to trying to get something for someone else? It would explain a lot. S: I didn’t take anything! An example… PO: Mr. Smith, we’ve got a solid case here. You’ve been identified in the footage. Now, if you tell me you were just there because you were passing by and had no involvement in the theft, we can work with that. But if you keep denying everything, it’s going to look much worse. S: I already told you, I wasn’t there! PO: Listen, I’m offering you an out here. Either you tell me you were just there by accident, or we move forward assuming you’re the main suspect. I don’t want to see you get into more trouble. So, were you just passing by? S: … Perhaps I might have walked by? But I didn’t go inside. PO: Okay, that’s a start. Now, if you did go inside, even just for a second, it’s important to admit that too. Maybe you didn’t mean to steal anything. Things can happen, right? S: No! I didn’t go inside!  Human error sources in police interviewing/interrogation Use of trickery and deceit (minimization, maximization, bluffing, …) False confidence of being a good lie detector Not listening, constant interruptions, too many questions, high pace Cognitive and behavioural biases (e.g., confirmation bias) CAN SET A CHAIN REACTION IN MOTION Aggressive or Behavioural Confirmation Presumption Belief Premature suggestive response of of of guilt perseverance closure questioning suspect presumption False confessions Suspect = perpetrator Suspect ≠ perpetrator Suspect confesses Correct/true confession False confession (false positive) Suspect denies False denial (false negative) Correct/true denial 3 types of false confessions: 1. Voluntary false confession 2. Coerced-compliant false confession Pressure/coercion by police 3. Coerced-internalized false confession Eyewitness memory Sensory information from external environment Rehearsal Encoding Sensory Attention Short-term Long-term memory memory memory Retrieval Not attended to Not rehearsed Some information may be lost or become Lost from Lost from inaccessible over time sensory memory ST memory Error sources in memory Acquisition Retention Retrieval Event factors Forgetting Police interview Witness factors Post-event Difficult topics information Eyewitness identification procedures Sensitive: must allow a reliable witness to make an identification Fair: the possibility of a witness making a mistaken identification has to be acceptably low Error sources in identification procedures Estimator variables System variables Event & witness factors Identification method Cross-race identification Selection of fillers Decision speed Instructions Viewing time Blind vs non-blind Cumulative disadvantage in the criminal justice system?  Biases at the level of the police “Guilty by association” Ethnic minorities more frequently stopped, searched, arrested & killed Causes? Can hinder communication Language bias Cross-cultural interaction Dealing with authority figures Human lie detection Biases at the level of the court Culture influences strategies Cultural defence Jury composition Similarity-leniency effect Stereotype activation Jury decision-making Procedural justice Expressions of guilt or shame Diagnosing personality disorders Estimating recidivism risk