Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Another nail in the coffin for the Lewkowskian model of free will

  1. #1

    Default Another nail in the coffin for the Lewkowskian model of free will

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/14/us/14confess.html

    Excerpt:

    “I beat myself up a lot” about having confessed, Mr. Lowery said in a recent interview. “I thought I was the only dummy who did that.”

    But more than 40 others have given confessions since 1976 that DNA evidence later showed were false, according to records compiled by Brandon L. Garrett, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law. Experts have long known that some kinds of people — including the mentally impaired, the mentally ill, the young and the easily led — are the likeliest to be induced to confess. There are also people like Mr. Lowery, who says he was just pressed beyond endurance by persistent interrogators.

    New research shows how people who were apparently uninvolved in a crime could provide such a detailed account of what occurred, allowing prosecutors to claim that only the defendant could have committed the crime.

    An article by Professor Garrett draws on trial transcripts, recorded confessions and other background materials to show how incriminating facts got into those confessions — by police introducing important facts about the case, whether intentionally or unintentionally, during the interrogation.

    To defense lawyers, the new research is eye opening. “In the past, if somebody confessed, that was the end,” said Peter J. Neufeld, a founder of the Innocence Project, an organization based in Manhattan. “You couldn’t imagine going forward.”

    The notion that such detailed confessions might be deemed voluntary because the defendants were not beaten or coerced suggests that courts should not simply look at whether confessions are voluntary, Mr. Neufeld said. “They should look at whether they are reliable.”

    Professor Garrett said he was surprised by the complexity of the confessions he studied. “I expected, and think people intuitively think, that a false confession would look flimsy,” like someone saying simply, “I did it,” he said.

    Instead, he said, “almost all of these confessions looked uncannily reliable,” rich in telling detail that almost inevitably had to come from the police. “I had known that in a couple of these cases, contamination could have occurred,” he said, using a term in police circles for introducing facts into the interrogation process. “I didn’t expect to see that almost all of them had been contaminated.”

    Of the exonerated defendants in the Garrett study, 26 — more than half — were “mentally disabled,” under 18 at the time or both. Most were subjected to lengthy, high-pressure interrogations, and none had a lawyer present. Thirteen of them were taken to the crime scene.
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  2. #2
    What's this have to do with Lewk? If you're dumb or weak minded enough to confess to a crime you didn't commit, then sucks to be you. This is a society of personal responsibility. Commit a crime or falsely confess, you're still responsible for your actions, you still go to jail, and nobody's at fault but you. Loser.
    The Rules
    Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
    Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
    Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)

  3. #3
    Let sleeping tigers lie Khendraja'aro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the forests of the night
    Posts
    6,238
    Well, I guess that's a pretty good reason to not talk to the police without a lawyer present.
    When the stars threw down their spears
    And watered heaven with their tears:
    Did he smile his work to see?
    Did he who made the lamb make thee?

  4. #4
    It really does boggle me how often people do slip like this. I guess the psychological need to try and clear the air immediately prevails over being rational and calm. Which is totally understandable.

  5. #5
    How many hours do they endure questioning, and under what questions.. how many repeteated sessions?

    I guess the key here is that they need to find unique aspects about the crime that weren't hinted at or given by the interrogaters were examining a confession, especially one made under some sort of duress. Also to look at parts of the confession that don't match the evidence as a way to deem it one gotten through pressure of various sorts.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by EyeKhan View Post
    What's this have to do with Lewk? If you're dumb or weak minded enough to confess to a crime you didn't commit, then sucks to be you. This is a society of personal responsibility. Commit a crime or falsely confess, you're still responsible for your actions, you still go to jail, and nobody's at fault but you. Loser.
    And that's sad. It should be a society of responsibility, not just personal responsibility. The police have a responsibility to figure out the truth even if you're lying about being the one who did it or are juuust mentally capable enough to give a false confession.

    ...am I watching too many Closer episodes?

  7. #7
    Honestly if you confess to a crime that you didn't commit you should be in jail. The real criminal has now got away clean because of your lies.

  8. #8
    I'm not surprised you can't understand the difference between lying with criminal intent and giving a false confession due to a combination of mental vulnerability, duress, lack of legal counsel and police sloppiness. I mean, you don't believe in psychiatric illness or in its relevance to accountability, right?

    Let's face it, what you're really trying to say is that a number of cops, prosecutors and judges should be in jail for letting real criminals get away because of their ignorance and incompetence that led to unchallenged false confessions. They should be getting a C- at most.


    Now, as for TORTURE...
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  9. #9
    After his initial confession, he said, the interrogators went over the crime with him in detail — asking how he did it, but correcting him when he got the facts wrong. How did he get in? “I said, ‘I kicked in the front door.’ ” But the rapist had used the back door, so he admitted to having gone around to the back. “They fed me the answers,” he recalled.

    Some defendants’ confessions even include mistakes fed by the police. Earl Washington Jr., a mentally impaired man who spent 18 years in prison and came within hours of being executed for a murder he did not commit, stated in his confession that the victim had worn a halter top. In fact, she had worn a sundress, but an initial police report had stated that she wore a halter top.
    Fortunately, many people involved in law enforcement are more interested than Lewkowski is in doing the right thing and doing a good job, so they recognise the problem and are taking steps to ameliorate it. Why? Because they can see when they're wrong and they can admit to being wrong. This is why they have some hope of doing better in the future.


    I rate Lewk's first post in this thread as a D-,
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  10. #10
    I stand by my statement that if you're mentally ill enough to confess to a crime you didn't commit, you would be better off not on the street. Now if the police actually do use torture (physical violence) then yeah that is the police officers fault.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    I stand by my statement that if you're mentally ill enough to confess to a crime you didn't commit, you would be better off not on the street.
    Hogwash. You can be mentally ill or vulnerable without being a danger to anyone else. And if you shouldn't be on the street then you sure as hell shouldn't be locked up with real violent criminals in an environment that encourages rape and abuse of prisoners. At most you should be in psychiatric care.

    Now if the police actually do use torture (physical violence) then yeah that is the police officers fault.
    My point was that information obtained through torture is unreliable. I'm glad you agree that people who torture alleged terrorists should be held accountable.
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  12. #12
    I said police. Not super awesome CIA agents...

    And we don't interrogate terrorists for confessions silly. Confessions are important for trials. Why give a trial to a terrorist when we can sit them in Gitmo indefinitely. :0

  13. #13
    alleged

    F on reading skills

    contamination

    F on comprehension skills
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •