Coerced or nonvoluntary confessions

Wakefield, Hollida; Underwager, Ralph

doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-0798(199823)16:4<423::aid-bsl319>3.3.co;2-u

Cited by 4 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a case involving a disputed confession, the judge holds a preliminary hearing to decide whether to admit the confession into the trial. Once a judge admits a confession, jurors must determine whether a confession is voluntary (see Arizona v. Fulminante , ; Wakefield & Underwager, ), and in these cases jurors must evaluate police deception in general and the FEP or FEPs used in their particular trial. Several important considerations emerged as the individual participants evaluated FEPs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Juries in simulation studies value confessions over other forms of evidence such as eyewitness and character evidence (Kassin & Neumann, ). Although the Supreme Court decision Arizona v. Fulminante () suggested that jurors are capable of evaluating the voluntariness of confessions and disregarding confessions ruled as coerced (see Wakefield & Underwager, ), Kassin and Sukel () demonstrated that mock jurors who were told to disregard a coerced and subsequently inadmissible confession were significantly more likely to convict defendants than were mock jurors who remained ignorant of the confession. These results suggest that presenting confession evidence in court only to render it inadmissible amounts to much more than the “harmless error” suggested by Arizona v. Fulimante ().…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

False‐Evidence Ploys and Interrogations: Mock Jurors' Perceptions of False‐Evidence Ploy Type, Deception, Coercion, and Justification

Forrest

Woody

Brady

et al. 2012

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We studied mock jurors' evaluations of police false-evidence ploys across two false-evidence ploy information conditions (true or false confession). Study 1 participants evaluated lists of demeanor, testimonial, and scientific ploys and rated testimonial false-evidence ploys as more coercive than demeanor false-evidence ploys. Participants in the false-confession condition rated false-evidence ploys as more deceptive than did participants in the true-confession condition. Study 2 participants evaluated false-evidence ploy types within interrogation transcripts. Participants rated testimonial false-evidence ploys as more deceptive and coercive than demeanor false-evidence ploys; participants in the true-confession condition rated false-evidence ploys as more justified. Across studies, participants reading realistic transcripts rated false-evidence ploys as more deceptive and coercive. We discuss implications for scholars, attorneys, and interrogators.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

False‐Evidence Ploys and Interrogations: Mock Jurors' Perceptions of False‐Evidence Ploy Type, Deception, Coercion, and Justification

Forrest

Woody

Brady

et al. 2012

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reasonably, the latter finding is explained by the participants' insight that a confession expedites the legal process (Baldwin, 1993;Evans, 1994;McKenzie, 1994;Milne & Bull, 1999;Stephenson, 1992), and is of high value for the prosecutor (e.g. Baldwin & McConville, 1980;Kassin, 1997;Kassin & Neumann, 1997;McCann, 1998;Stephenson & Moston, 1994;Underwager & Wagefield, 1992;Wagefield & Underwager, 1998).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Police officers' views of effective interview tactics with suspects: The effects of weight of case evidence and discomfort with ambiguity

Häkkänen

Ask

Kebbell

et al. 2008

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the effects of case-specific facts and individual discomfort with ambiguity (DA) on investigators' beliefs concerning effective interviewing tactics for suspects. Violent crime investigators (n ¼ 30) responded to a questionnaire including the Need for Closure Scale (NFCS) and ratings of the importance of 39 interrogation tactics in two hypothetical interrogations with a homicide suspect, where the evidence consisted of either technical evidence or soft information. Twenty tactics were analysed with a multidimensional scaling procedure which confirmed two discrete interviewing themes: humane and dominant. More tactics, both dominant and humane, were rated as important if the evidence was soft compared with technical. In the soft evidence condition, investigators who were high on DA rated both types of tactics as more important than did low-DA investigators. In the technical evidence condition, no such difference emerged.

show abstract

“…A number of studies have now been done on the GSS (see Wakefield & Underwager, 1998), and the manual (Gudjonsson, 1997) provides normative data from a number of populations. Intelligence has been found to correlate negatively with GSS suggestibility scores in several studies (Clare & Gudjonsson, 1993;Gudjonsson, 1997;Richardson & Kelly, 1995).…”

Section: Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scalesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Admissibility of Expert Testimony Based on the Grisso and Gudjonsson Scales in Disputed Confession Cases

Fulero¹

2010

The Journal of Psychiatry & Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While Grisso's scales for the measurement of competency to waive Miranda rights were originally developed in the late 1970s and early 1980s, they were published for commercial use in 1998. Similarly, the Gudjonsson scale for the measurement of interrogative suggestibility was developed in the late 1970s and early 1980s, but published for commercial use in 1997. Since that time, psychologists have sought to use these scales as the basis for expert testimony in cases involving a defendant's competency to waive Miranda rights, and in cases involving a defendant's confession in which the defense is based on the argument that the defendant was suggestible and therefore may have given a false confession. Such cases are beginning to be reported, as the use of the scales becomes more common, and as they are challenged under Daubert or Frye standards of admissibility. This article looks at the emerging case law in this area.

show abstract

Coerced or nonvoluntary confessions

Cited by 4 publications

References 9 publications

False‐Evidence Ploys and Interrogations: Mock Jurors' Perceptions of False‐Evidence Ploy Type, Deception, Coercion, and Justification

False‐Evidence Ploys and Interrogations: Mock Jurors' Perceptions of False‐Evidence Ploy Type, Deception, Coercion, and Justification

Police officers' views of effective interview tactics with suspects: The effects of weight of case evidence and discomfort with ambiguity

Admissibility of Expert Testimony Based on the Grisso and Gudjonsson Scales in Disputed Confession Cases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About