Abstract
Mistakes in decision-making have been identified as the most common type of error in police investigations. Consequently, wrongful convictions and other types of criminal investigative failure may require a complete case ‘rethinking,’ particularly when new evidence disrupts the existing theory. A rush to judgment resulting in a premature shift from an evidence-based to a suspect-based investigation can produce a number of problematic thinking errors. Faulty assumptions, tunnel vision, groupthink, and other cognitive biases and organizational traps hinder evidentiary interpretation and evaluation. This article outlines a protocol for reviewing evidence and rethinking a wrongful conviction or unsolved crime when the existing investigative theory appears to be incorrect. The protocol involves four stages: (1) evidence; (2) interpretation; (3) patterns; and (4) analysis.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
