False Confessions

There has been much talk recently, concerning false confessions, coercion on the part of custodial officers and the practice of the interrogation of juveniles.  This is a large issue that has cost the future of many juveniles.  Before you read the article below, I am going to relate my own personal experience in this area. 

Most of you know that I have a son in prison serving 66 years and incarcerated at the age of 17.  What I am about to tell you should serve as a warning to parents and a request on the behalf of parents of juveniles to attorney’s and lawmakers to help us find a way to protect our children. 

The first time that my son was questioned concerning this specific crime was at the high school he was attending.  I was not notified that authorities wanted to ask questions, no adult was in the room with him (questioned in a private office at school) and as a result my son could not be properly advised concerning his response to authorities.  I want to tell you now, with emphasis, that my position on how we instruct our children has changed drastically.  The next time that my son was questioned is even more cunning.  They arrived at his work place (several plain closed investigators) and asked if he would come down to the police station.  They told him that they just needed clarification on some things and that they didn’t have enough officers on duty to warrant asking the questions right then, plus it would save him embarrassment at his work place.  They also asked if they could talk on the way to the station and asked my son to ride with them.  Another officer would drive his car to the station so that he would have transportation later.  My son complied believing that as long as he cooperated they would have no cause to mistreat him. 

A plain closed officer came to my workplace and met me in the parking lot as I was getting off work.  He had obviously been waiting for me to come out.  He told me that they had my son at the police station and they needed me to come down.  When I asked why, he would tell me nothing.  When I arrived at the police station, I was ushered in with the assistance of this officer through locked doors, inaccessible elevators and finally to the locked room where my son was held.  Remember this as it is important later. 

They questioned my son for 2 1/2 hours.  At one point, when the first set of officers had completed their questioning, I was going to take my son and leave.  They asked if I would give them a few more minutes as a couple of other officers needed answers to a few more questions.  I should have left but I didn’t.  They showed us a video of the confession of one of my sons friends.  I could tell by the video that this kid was saying what they wanted to hear.  It was not the confession of a young man who had killed anyone.  This young man believed what the officers had told him…..they would go easy on him if he would just confess. 

After we returned to the interrogation room, they arrested my son and charged him with 3 counts of first degree murder.  His last words were, “Mom, I don’t care what it takes, sell stuff, sell the house and get me a good attorney.  I don’t want to go down for something I didn’t do.”  Then he added, “Don’t worry mom, the truth always comes out.”

If you will notice, my son was never read his MIRANDA rights.  I, being a trusting citizen, did not suspect that I was being manipulated, and by cooperating, was putting my son in peril.  The issue of MIRANDA was raised and the district court ruled that his rights had been violated.  When the DA appealed the ruling, the appellate court ruled that it was not clear whether or not I understood if we were “free to leave at anytime”.  That brings up the security that I had to pass through in order to reach my son.  There was no way for me to leave that building without the assistance of an officer.

We are still trying to undo what was done.  Parents, do not advise your children to give any more information other than their name, address and the name of their parents.  Parents, do not allow your children to be questioned without the presence of  an attorney, EVER!

The final point….when the video of my sons interrogation was shown in court, it had been edited.  I remembered that night very well and I remembered the course of questioning and the resulting action.  The video presented in the court room did not show me trying to leave with my son.  It had been edited.   Read on………

False Confessions: What would it take to make you confess?

by John Terzano The Justice Project

Share this on Twitter - False Confessions: What would it take to make you confess?

Tue Jul 14, 2009 at 06:13:33 AM PDT

Why would anyone confess to a crime they did not commit? What would it take to get you to confess to a crime? For Christopher Ochoa, it took twenty hours of questioning and badgering and threats to get him to falsely confess to the murder of a woman in Austin, Texas. As a result, he spent twelve years in prison for a crime he did not commit.

Most people find it hard to understand how anyone could ever confess to a crime they did not commit. But it happens over and over again. False confessions are a well-documented reality, especially among vulnerable populations like juveniles and the mentally-impaired. Of all the DNA exonerations nationwide, false confessions occur in over 20 percent of them.

Last week, two major newspapers highlighted two different cases where the confessions of the defendants had been called into questions.

·                                 John Terzano The Justice Project’s diary :: ::

·                                  

As recently reported in the New York Times, Michael Scott and Robert Springsteen were released in late June after new DNA evidence from an unknown individual cast doubt on their confessions in the murders of four teenage girls in Austin, TX. Attorneys for both men claim the confessions were the result of police coercion and misconduct. As reported in the Chicago Tribune, Ronald Kitchen spent twenty-one years in prison following a confession he made about the murders of five people. After allegations of abuse and torture on behalf of the officer responsible for securing the confession surfaced, his case was turned over to the Attorney General’s office to re-investigate. Kitchen was released when prosecutors dropped all charges against him because they found no evidence he was involved in the crime.

To a jury or judge, a confession is an incredibly powerful piece of evidence. It can overwhelm evidence pointing to a defendant’s innocence, and judges and juries will sometimes convict an individual based on a confession alone. Given the weight of this evidence, special care must be taken to ensure that confessions are accurate.

How can we prevent against false confessions? States can adopt a policy that requires law enforcement officers to record custodial interrogations, from the delivery of a suspect’s Miranda rights to the end of the interview, without interruption. Electronic recording of custodial interrogations has emerged as a powerful innovation and fact-finding tool for both sides of the criminal justice system. It helps protect innocent suspects and helps convict the guilty.

When interrogations are recorded, officers are free to study the suspect’s reactions instead of scribbling notes. Judges and juries are able to see exactly what took place during the interrogation, allowing them to more effectively weigh the evidence. In addition, recording can protect officers from false claims of abuse or coercion and provide an excellent tool for training new officers on proper interrogation techniques. Ultimately, recording is in the best interest of all parties – the defense, the prosecution, and the public – that strong safeguards exist to protect against wrongful imprisonment and reduce the number of convictions overturned on appeal.

Many detectives and prosecutors enthusiastically embrace electronic recording. Over 450 police and sheriff’s departments across the country have independently adopted recording procedures. Unfortunately though, only ten states have statewide laws that require electronic recording. The virtue of electronic recording of custodial interrogations lies not only in its ability to help guard against false confessions, but also in its ability to develop the strongest evidence possible to help convict the guilty. Electronic recording incurs minimal costs to the state in terms of implementation, and when compared to the human and monetary costs of wrongful convictions, it is a sound policy. Every state has a responsibility to protect the life and liberty of its citizens. Electronic recording is a simple reform that can help states live up to that responsibility by helping to create a more fair and accurate criminal justice system.

John F. Terzano is President of The Justice Project, a nonpartisan organization that works to increase fairness and accuracy in the criminal justice system.

This entry was posted on 29. July 2009 at 13:13 and is filed under Prison Reform Advocates, Juvenile Reform Advocates, From Families of Juvenile Offenders. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.

| Print