Admission of guilt for a crime not committed is a common phenomenon among suspects. Law enforcement officers are castigated for inducing false confessions that lead to conviction of the innocent, an observation corroborated by hundreds of convicts exonerated by new evidence. Conviction and imprisonment of individuals for serious crimes they did not commit happens frequently in high profile-cases. Reduction of such instances is dependent on the deployment of interrogations techniques with less potential to induce false confessions.
The risk-benefit ratio of interrogation techniques used in false confessions is strongly related to the scarring experiences of suspects, and the costs of incarceration and exoneration. When examined from such a perspective, the benefits of using ameliorative interrogation techniques outweigh the risks of not using them. The observation is made from the point of view that the interrogation techniques seek to address the primary causes of false confessions namely: misclassification, coercion, and contamination. False confessions methods dramatically reduce the chances of occurrence of these causes, thereby, preventing the likelihood of false confessions and associated negative consequences.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The interrogation techniques in false confessions have a higher likelihood of getting legitimate confessions. For instance, in the Reid Technique, the interrogation is preceded by fact analysis and behavior analysis interview. The aim is to generate reliable interview and investigation results on whether the suspect was involved in the commission of the crime or not. Interrogation only occurs when the evidence strongly suggests involvement. Therefore, by establishing a reason for interrogations, the technique is less likely to lead to false confessions. It is important to remain apprehensive of the fact that misclassification, psychological coercion, and contamination are likely to influence the results of the initial interview and interrogation. This implies interrogation may be conducted on a false assumption of commission of a crime, leaving the suspect with little choice but to give a false confession. However, the potential of the techniques to lower the likelihood of false confessions implies their application is worthy.
Forensic psychologists apply clinical aspects to legal and forensic issues and people facing the law. Additionally, they apply research and experimentations from other fields of psychology to explain phenomena in the legal area. Therefore, forensic psychologists draw on their knowledge to conduct psychological assessments of crime suspects. The use of clinical and research paradigms assists in the explanation of behavior, hence linking it to the results of interrogation. Understanding of suspects’ behavior can lower the risk of eliciting false confessions. Forensic psychologists can also assist in the assessment of the results of interrogation to establish the presence or absence of inconsistencies in the confessions based on the suspects’ behavior. The aim is to ascertain the motivation in issuance of the confession, a critical process that can lead to identification of false confessions and exoneration.
