Identification and Evaluation of Criminal Suspects II Lecture Notes PDF

Identification and Evaluation of Criminal Suspects II: Interviewing Suspects and False Confessions Associate Professor Helen Paterson Phone: 9036 9403 Email: [email protected] The Plan… Interrogation  Background  Nine-step approach to get a suspect to talk  Criticisms of nine-s...

Identification and Evaluation of Criminal Suspects II: Interviewing Suspects and False Confessions Associate Professor Helen Paterson Phone: 9036 9403 Email: [email protected] The Plan… Interrogation  Background  Nine-step approach to get a suspect to talk  Criticisms of nine-step approach False Confessions  Types of false confessions  Why do false confessions occur?  False confession in the lab Good Tactics for Suspect Interviews  How to let a suspect talk  Current practices Learning Outcomes At the end of this lecture you will be able to:  Describe and critically evaluate the nine-step approach to interrogation  Define false confessions and state the frequency of false confessions  Name and describe three types of false confessions  Describe laboratory research on false confessions  Describe best practice techniques for conducting suspect interviews Background There are two goals of a police interrogation  Gain information that will further the investigation  Obtain a confession The importance of the interrogation depends on evidence available. Some assume that suspects are guilty, non-cooperative, and have to be forced to talk. Background History of coercive measures used in police interrogations:  Mid-1900s: whipping suspects to get a confession  1980s: stun guns used by the NYPD to extract confessions  More recently: psychological methods such as trickery and deceit How to get the suspects to talk The most influential handbook about interrogation techniques is ‘Criminal Interrogations and Confessions’ by Inbau, Reid, and Buckley (1986) These techniques are allowed in the USA, but are unlawful in many Western European countries and Australia How to get the suspects to talk The Inbau et al. model of interrogation involves 3 general stages: 1. Gather evidence 2. Conduct a non-accusatorial interview to assess deception/guilt 3. Conduct an accusatorial interrogation to obtain a confession* How to get the suspects to talk The third stage involves 9 steps that are used to break down the suspect’s resistance: 1. Positive confrontation 2. Theme development 3. Handling denials 4. Overcoming objections 5. Retaining suspect’s attention 6. Handling the suspect’s mood 7. Creating an opportunity to confess 8. Oral confession 9. Converting an oral confession into a written one Setting Small, bare room Control of things such as lighting should be inaccessible to suspect Invasion of suspect’s physical space One-way mirror 1. Positive Confrontation A direct presentation of real or fictional evidence and the suspect’s involvement in the crime Suspects’ behavioural cues are observed Repetition of accusation 2. Theme development Psychological themes developed to justify the crime Differs depending on suspect’s emotional state –Emotional: Minimisation –Non-emotional: Maximisation 3. Handling denials Stopping the suspect’s repetition or elaboration of denials  The more frequently a suspect repeats a lie, the harder it is for the interrogator to persuade suspects to tell the truth  Innocent suspects will not allow their denials to be cut off, but guilty suspects will 4. Overcoming objections Overcome objections by showing understanding and returning to the conversation theme 5. Retaining suspect’s attention Interrogator retains the suspects attention by moving physically closer to the suspect, leaning in towards him/her, and maintaining eye contact 6. Handling the suspect’s passive mood Interrogator focuses the suspect’s mind on possible reasons for committing the crime. Interrogator exhibits signs of sympathy, urges suspect to tell the truth, and creates a remorseful mood 7. Creating an opportunity to confess Suspects are given an opportunity to provide an explanation or excuse for the crime  Given two alternative explanations of the crime to choose from: –An ‘unacceptable’ excuse –An ‘acceptable’ excuse 8. Oral confession Development of the initial confession that discloses the circumstances, motives, and details of a crime Questions should be brief, clear and non- emotionally charged, and responses should be brief 9. Converting an oral confession into a written one This step is important because suspects sometimes deny that they made an oral confession. A Social-Psychological Explanation of the 9-Step Approach Explained in terms of attitude change Minimisation emphasises the positive aspects of admitting guilt Maximisation emphasises the negative aspects of not making a confession Together these techniques are used to create a more positive attitude towards confession Nine concerns with the 9-steps approach 1. Officers enter the interrogation with the belief that the suspect is guilty, which can lead to inappropriate biases 2. Trickery and deceit are unlawful in several countries and unethical 3. Pressing suspects to confess may result in the opposite effects (the “boomerang effect”) and suspects may retain strong feelings of resentment towards police 4. Guilty suspect may catch on to bluffing and not believe anything told Nine concerns with the 9-steps approach cont. 5. Police may think it’s okay to bluff in other circumstances 6. Vulnerable suspects may get PTSD 7. Brief responses from suspects might not give the whole, accurate story 8. Assumes that police officers can accurately detect deception when little evidence supports this assumption and indicators of deception endorsed are not appropriate 9. Technique may lead to false confessions False Confessions False confession occurs when individuals confess to a crime they did not commit or exaggerates their involvement in a crime they did commit 27% of prisoners later exonerated by DNA evidence had given false confessions Frequency of False Confessions 95% of all new inmates to prisons in Iceland interviewed over 12 month period (Gudjonsson & Sigurdsson, 1994) 12% claimed to have made a false confession during a police interview; 78% convicted of this offence. Slightly more than half said made a false confession to escape police interrogation; slightly less than half say did it to protect another Types of False Confessions There are three types of false confessions (Gudjonsson, 2003): 1. Voluntary 2. Coerced-compliant 3. Coerced-internalised 1. Voluntary False Confessions A voluntary false confession occurs without being prompted by the police Why?  A desire for notoriety  An inability to distinguish fact from fantasy  An attempt to protect the real offender  A need to be punished 2. Coerced-Compliant False Confessions A coerced-compliant false confession occurs in response to a desire to escape further interrogation, gain a promised reward, or avoid a threatened punishment The confessor knows that they did not commit the crime 3. Coerced-Internalised False Confession A coerced-internalised false confession results from highly suggestive interrogations The confessor comes to believe that he/she did commit the crime (i.e., ‘internalises’). Often starts as coerced-compliant. Some people, such as those with learning disabilities, are more susceptible to this type of confession (Gudjonsson, 1992) Compliance and Suggestibility Two psychological constructs are important in understanding false confessions:  Compliance: Tendency to go along with people in authority  Suggestibility: Tendency to internalise information communicated during questioning False Confessions in the Laboratory Participants accused of committing a “crime”– pressing the “Alt key” when told not to because computer crashes. However, computer set to crash automatically(Kassin & Kiechel, 1996). Manipulated:  Participant’s vulnerability (typing fast/slow pace)  Presence of false evidence (confederate witness or not) Measured percentage of false confessions to pressing “Alt key” False Confessions in the Laboratory No False Evidence False Evidence Slow Fast Slow Fast Pace Pace Pace Pace Compliance 35% 65% 89% 100% Internalisation 0 12% 44% 65% Confabulation 0 0 6% 35% Kassin & Kiechel, 1996 False Confessions in the Laboratory Two factors increase risk of false confessions: 1. Suspect who lacks clear memory of the event 2. The presentation of false evidence False Confessions in the Laboratory Horselenberg et al. (2003) criticised Kassin & Kiechel’s study (1996) as participant does not suffer any negative consequences for confession Replicated K&K study, but participants told they will lose 80% of fee if sign confession. 82% signed; 42% internalised The Admissibility of Confessions For confessions to be admitted into court they must be given:  Voluntarily and  By a person who is competent Confessions that are obtained by overtly coercive tactics will not be admissible in court The Cost of False Confessions The Confessor (!) The police: Diverted down a false trail that may waste valuable time that could be used to ID and apprehend the real offender The public: If it is revealed people falsely confessed, the public may be less trusting of the capabilities of the police The offender is free to offend again! How to Let the Suspect Talk Now the focus is on “investigative interviewing” rather than “interrogation” PEACE model  Planning and preparation  Engage and explain  Account  Closure  Evaluation Based on an interview method known as conversation management, which encourages information gathering over securing a confession Strategic Use of Evidence (SUE) The 9-step approach encourages the early disclosure of evidence to increase the likelihood of a confession. However, this may be detrimental to innocent suspects and beneficial to guilty suspects (Giolla & Granhag, 2018) According to the SUE technique, late disclosure of evidence can help distinguish truthtellers from liars (Hartwig et al., 2005; ) Current Practices In Australia all interviews with suspects must be recorded using Electronic Recording of Interviews with Suspects (ERISP) Current Practices Videotaping interrogations is becoming more common Benefits include:  Protects police against false allegations of abuse  Protects citizens from police coercion  Allows courts to make informed decisions Current Practices But, confession culture may live on because: –Pressure on police to solve crimes quickly –Suspects who confess are more likely to plead guilty –Confession evidence helps prosecution –Detectives who obtain confessions are highly regarded –Police officers often assume suspect is guilty How Many Suspects Confess? Confession rates range from 49-61% Similar confession rates before and after changes in laws regarding manipulative and persuasive tactics, and similar confession rates in the US The stereotypical beliefs that suspects deny involvement in crimes and prefer to remain silent are untrue Only a small minority of suspects change their ‘position’ throughout an interview Why Do Suspects Confess? Significant predictors of confession include: 1. Strength of evidence 2. Perceived seriousness of crime 3. The presence of a legal advisor 4. Criminal history of the suspect Take Home Message Persuasive techniques to get a suspect to talk are criticised for being manipulative. They can cause false confessions and are illegal in some countries. Instead, techniques to let a suspect talk are being endorsed