¶ … video is very shocking because it basically exposes how law enforcement officers will use duress or "wear down" a suspect and provide that suspect with details of a crime so that the suspect can later "confess" in detail about the crime that he/she committed -- when in actuality the story was essentially fed to the suspect by the officers who think (or not) that they have found the guilty party and just need to coerce him (over a number of hours -- not recorded on videotape) using whatever tactics they deem necessary (the judge and jury never see these tactics because they are not recorded but it may be surmised that they border on torture, which should invalidate any confession then and there). What is most infuriating is that these officers essentially act as judge and jury themselves in that they determine the guilt of their suspect and then "get him" to go along with their finding. It is not the way law enforcement agents should: their job is to gather evidence, not to make it up.
What I learned from this video about how and why false confessions occur is that officers will "interrogate" a suspect...
Why this happens is a little bit of a mystery but it may be surmised that it happens because officers think they have found their man and just need to break him through interrogation and "feeding" of info tactics.
This is definitely a problem because it fosters false confessions which lead to unjust convictions and innocent persons going to jail, sometimes for a long time. This is not justice and should be prevented at once. How can a justice system allow such activity to go on and still take itself seriously? It cannot. Therefore, it is very important that the Innocence Project succeed in its aims of to enforce a law that officers must tape an entire interrogation process. However, as the Project notes, this is still not enough of a solution because as is the case now, how is one to know whether the officers taped the whole interrogation or just the parts that they want the jury to see? Therefore, it is up to a judge to hold a hearing before the…
Wrongful Conviction Review: Henry James Wrongful convictions are convictions where "factually innocent people are convicted of crimes" (Acker & Redlich, 2011, p.3). There are a number of ways that wrongful convictions can occur. Two of these ways are no crime convictions and wrong man convictions (Acker & Reclich, 2011, p.7-8). No crime convictions occur when someone is convicted of a crime, generally murder, and then it is later discovered that no
Wrongful Conviction of James Henry Henry James was only 19 years during his conviction for rape that he did not commit. It is after thirty years imprisonment that the realization of his innocence emerges thereby keeping it free. This case is a good example of the importance of evidence in the proceedings of a case. The imprisonment of the innocent man arose because of the little evidence that he had against
The over-enthusiasm associated with the extensive and unrestrained caution which the prosecutors avail gives birth to the settings in which a prosecutor is able to cause the conviction of an innocent individual. Besides, the mixture of over-enthusiasm and unimpeded discretion on one side and regular non-adversarialness on the other outcomes in an irregular playing field in majority of the defendants either guilty or innocent. (Griffin, 1274) The apparent cases of
Why would somebody confess to a crime they did not commit? According to professor Kassin, Saul, there are several types of people who falsely confess: compulsive type-attention seeker -- confesses to gain a piece of the fame, impress others, or to get attention compulsive type-homeless -- confesses as a way to get off the streets compulsive type-fugitive -- confesses to avoid being prosecuted for a crime elsewhere with stiffer penalties compulsive
Wrongful Convictions Based on Eyewitness Accounts Imagine if you will this hypothetical scenario -- you are walking to your car in a parking garage after a long day at work. You are tired and thinking of what is waiting for you on your desk tomorrow and what you will have to eat when you get home. Suddenly, a man jumps out from behind a parked car and points a gun at
(iv) misconduct by the police or unintentional mistake, together with the application of suggestive identification procedures, pressuring of a confession or inculpatory declaration by a suspect, not carrying out other channels of investigation following initial detection of a powerful suspect, and being unsuccessful to give the prosecutor enough proof which is able to point to an individual other than the defendant as the person behind the act. (v) Mistake