Abstract
Canada's legal system recognizes that police interrogation procedures may contribute to false confessions and has provided safeguards designed to protect the rights of the accused and reduce the likelihood of these errors. Although it is difficult to determine how often false confessions occur, it is worth considering the extent to which Canadian legal protections are likely to be effective and the degree to which they address the relevant psychological issues that might increase the likelihood of a false confession. The purpose of this paper is to summarize some recent Canadian legal cases relevant to confession evidence (e.g. R. v. L.T.H., 2008; R. v. Mentuck, 2000; R. v. Oickle, 2000; R. v. Spencer, 2007) and to analyze Canadian law and police practice in the context of the scientific evidence available and in comparison to the practice of other jurisdictions. We also discuss directions for future research, and the ways in which psychological research could inform legal process and policy in the future.
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.
