Defendant's Confession Research Articles

소의 교환적 변경과 자백의 효력

This case involved a confession by the defendant to the claims asserted by the plaintiff in the first action. The plaintiff filed a new complaint and dismissed the old complaint through an exchangeable change of claim. The key point of the judgment in this case was that the defendant's confession was extinguished by the plaintiff's withdrawal of the complaint. While the main legal reasoning of this case is reasonable, there are a few more points to consider.
 First, the concept of revocation of a confession should be replaced with the concept of lapse of a confession. In this case, the confessing individual is not extinguishing his confession for reasons that would otherwise be attributable to himself. The confession was extinguished because of the exchangeable change of claim, which should be viewed as an effect of lapse of confession.
 Second, if the confessor relied on the confession as a defense in a lawsuit before the exchangeable change of claim, it does not extinguish the prior trial confession. This is because the act of procedure has already been formed based on the trial confession and it is necessary to ensure legal stability. It is also noted that the opposite party's consent to the exchangeable change of claim does not include consent to the revocation of the confession, unless there are special circumstances.

Human Rights Protection: The Rules for the Exclusion of Illegal Evidence and Confessions of the Accused

Evidence is an important piece of information to prove that a case has occurred. In the process of collecting evidence, illegal evidence obtained by the investigating authorities should be excluded. Confessions of the accused are very important verbal evidence in terms of evidence law and play a very important role in finding out the truth of the case. If an investigator uses illegal means to obtain evidence, it will not only invalidate the evidence but also violate the human rights of the defendant. Based on this, this study uses the comparative research method to analyse the link between the rules on the exclusion of illegal evidence and human rights, taking the defendant's confession as an example. As far as the results are concerned, one of the purposes for which the rule on the exclusion of illegal evidence was created is to safeguard human rights. Therefore, the rule on the exclusion of illegal evidence appears to be particularly necessary. In addition, in the context of China's legal system, the principle of voluntariness of the defendant can be deepened in the process of obtaining the defendant's statement, and the right to silence can be granted to the defendant. The combination of modern investigative techniques and the questioning of the defendant by the investigator will help the trial authorities to better restore the truth about the crime.

Challenges in the Implementation of the “Jalur Khusus” Concept in the Draft Indonesian Criminal Procedure Code

Efforts to reform the criminal procedural law continue to be carried out, by introducing many new concepts such as preliminary examination, expansion of the opportunity principle to the concept of a “jalur khusus” which is similar but not the same as the plea-bargaining concept applied in common law countries, especially the United States. The concept of this “jalur khusus” is understood to encourage the creation of an effective and efficient criminal justice system so that the principles of simple, fast, and low-cost justice can be realized. Of course, this new concept still needs to be studied its advantages and disadvantages. By using normative juridical research methods, this study aims to examine the challenges in applying the concept of “jalur khusus”s as stipulated in the RKUHAP. From this research, it can be seen that in addition to the ambiguity of the proceedings and the provisions on the maximum limit of punishment, what needs to be criticized is the parameters of the judge's belief in determining the truth of the defendant's confession and also the unregulated role of the victim in the “jalur khusus” mechanism.

Pencurian dengan Pemberatan yang Dilakukan Anak Belum Dewasa: Studi Kasus Putusan No. 41/Pid.Sus-Anak/2020/PN.Plg

One of the crimes that has been formulated in the Criminal Code or a crime called "Theft with Aggravation" is regulated in Article 363 paragraph (1) 5th of the Criminal Code in conjunction with Article 25 in conjunction with Article 26 paragraph (1) of Law Number 3 of 1997 concerning Juvenile Justice , Aggravated theft committed by a child is a criminal offense. The specificity of this type of criminal act lies in the perpetrator/subject of the crime, namely children who are classified as minors who still have a long future as the nation's next generation. The aim of the criminal justice process is not punishment, but improving the condition, maintenance and protection of children as well as preventing and overcoming their actions through constructive court action. As related to the case of aggravated theft committed by a minor in case Number: 41/Pid.Sus-Anak/2020/PN.Plg. The method in this research is a normative juridical method or library research, namely research by analyzing applicable legal norms, both in the form of laws and court decisions. Research data was obtained from library materials and legal documentation in the form of primary, secondary and tertiary law. Then the data is collected by investing in statutory regulations, books and literature related to the research material. Finally, the existing data is then analyzed qualitatively, namely carrying out analysis without using numbers or formulas. The results of the research show that firstly, in the process of resolving criminal acts committed by immature children, in the examination process both at the investigation level and in the trial process, the children have been accompanied by community counselors (BISPA), parents, and Advocates/Legal Advisors. Second, the punishment of children who committed the crime of theft with aggravation in Case No. 41/Pid.Sus-Anak/2020/PN. Plg, it is regulated in Article 363 paragraph (1) 4th of the Criminal Code. This is based on legal facts that have been revealed in the trial, both from the testimony of the victim and witnesses as well as from the defendant's confession.

Forensic Confirmation Bias: Do Jurors Discount Examiners Who Were Exposed to Task-Irrelevant Information?*, †.

Knowledge of task-irrelevant information influences judgments of forensic science evidence and thereby undermines their probative value (i.e., forensic confirmation bias). The current studies tested whether laypeople discount the opinion of a forensic examiner who had a priori knowledge of biasing information (i.e., a defendant's confession) that could have influenced his opinion. In three experiments, laypeople (N=765) read and evaluated a trial summary which, for some, included testimony from a forensic examiner who was either unaware or aware of the defendant's confession, and either denied or admitted that it could have impacted his opinion. When the examiner admitted that the confession could have influenced his opinion, laypeople generally discounted his testimony, as evidenced by their verdicts and other ratings. However, when the examiner denied being vulnerable to bias, laypeople tended to believe him-and they weighted his testimony as strongly as that of the confession-unaware examiner. In short, laypeople generally failed to recognize the superiority of forensic science judgments made by context-blind examiners, and they instead trusted examiners who claimed to be impervious to bias. As such, our findings highlight the value of implementing context management procedures in forensic laboratories so as not to mislead fact-finders.

Probative values and their affecting factors of criminal investigation records

Following improvements in evidential thinking, more questions have been raised about the probative values of criminal investigation records; therefore, there is an urgent need to investigate the prominent problems with this system for keeping investigation notes and evidence. The binding 2013 Criminal Procedural Law of the People's Republic of China lists the victim's statement, defendant's confession or defence, inspection, examination, identification, and investigation notes as statutory evidence. Technically, these criminal investigation records are naturally legally admissible as evidenced in criminal justice procedures. However, the Miranda rules of the United States, which guarantee the defendant's right to silence, have not been established in mainland China. Consequently, the objectivity of those kinds of criminal investigation records can be questioned during cross-examination. Comparative and systematic research methods were used to examine the probative values and their affecting factors in criminal investigation records. The results show that it is not easy to obtain the full probative value of criminal investigation records because it involves analyses of issues such as understanding the notes, procedures, and methods in making the records, as well as the reform of related systems, such as transplanting the Miranda rules to secure the defendant's right to silence and the presence of counsel. Only in this way can we expect evidence used in criminal investigation records to be used scientifically by ensuring that evidence of criminal acts are kept free from irrational contamination and resolve the existing related problems in judicial practice.

Guilty Pleas in an Inquisitorial Setting – An Empirical Study of France

Anglo‐American guilty pleas have inspired criminal justice reformers in many inquisitorially based systems in recent years, in response to caseload pressures. In France, two different procedures based on the defendant's confession were introduced in 1999 and 2004 respectively: an out‐of‐court disposal (the composition pénale) and a prosecution pathway (the comparution sur reconnaissance préalable de culpabilité). Basing its analysis upon direct observations and interviews with French public prosecutors, this article examines the impact of these procedures on the French criminal justice system and its actors. Rather than a move from an inquisitorial to a more adversarial system, data collected for this study show a bureaucratization of the French criminal justice process. The role of public prosecutors is changing from that of judicial officers to caseload managers who have delegated part of their workload to less qualified staff for efficiency purposes.

Qualification of Impeachment Evidence and Impeachment's Subject of Defendant's Statement - Centering around Arrest - detention Interview Document written Defendant's Confession Statement of Self - contradiction -

Qualification of Impeachment Evidence and Impeachment's Subject of Defendant's Statement - Centering around Arrest - detention Interview Document written Defendant's Confession Statement of Self - contradiction -

Juror sensitivity to false confession risk factors: Dispositional vs. situational attributions for a confession.

Research on jurors' perceptions of confession evidence suggests that jurors may not be sensitive to factors that can influence the reliability of a confession. Jurors' decisions tend not to be influenced by situational pressures to confess, which suggests that jurors commit the correspondence bias when evaluating a confession. One method to potentially increase sensitivity and counteract the correspondence bias is by highlighting a motivation other than guilt for the defendant's confession. We conducted 3 experiments to evaluate jurors' sensitivity to false confession risk factors. Participants read a trial transcript that varied the presence of false confession risk factors within an interrogation. Some participants also read testimony that presented an alternative motivation for the confession (expert testimony, Experiments 1 and 3; defendant testimony, Experiment 2). Across 3 experiments, participants were generally able to distinguish between interrogation practices that can produce a false confession, regardless of the presence or absence of expert or defendant testimony. Experiment 3 explored whether participants' attributions for the confessor's motivation were affected by interrogative pressure and expert testimony, and whether these attributions affected verdicts. Participants' reluctance to convict when false confession risk factors were present was associated with situational, rather than dispositional, attributions regarding the defendant's motivation to confess. It is possible that increased knowledge is responsible for participants' improved sensitivity to false confession risk factors. (PsycINFO Database Record

Examining the judicial decision to substitute credibility instructions for expert testimony on confessions

Purpose The present study tested the judicial decision to deny false confession expert testimony on the basis that jury instructions are sufficient to aid jurors in their determinations of disputed confession evidence. Methods Three groups of mock jurors (N = 150) were presented with a trial summary that included a videotaped re-enactment of an interrogation in which the interrogator used a maximization ploy. One group received expert testimony in the trial summary, another group received credibility instructions, and a control group received neither. All participants received standard reasonable doubt instructions at the end of the trial summary and then answered questions such as their verdict in the case, the defendant's likelihood of guilt, and the voluntariness of the defendant's confession. Results The results showed a high rate of conviction that was only reduced when participants received expert testimony. Across all measures, no significant differences were found between the control and credibility instruction groups. Conclusions The results suggest that credibility instructions are not comparable to expert testimony in influencing jurors' judgments of disputed confession evidence. These findings do not support the judicial decision to deny expert testimony on the basis that credibility instructions alone are sufficient to aid potential jurors in their evaluations of confession evidence. Avenues for future research on expert testimony and jury instructions in confession cases are discussed.

Murder must memorise

Memory reports usually provide the evidence that is most determinative of guilt or innocence in criminal proceedings—including in the most serious proceedings, capital murder trials. Thus memory research is bedrock science when it comes to the reliability of legal evidence, and expert testimony on such research is a linchpin of just verdicts. This principle is illustrated with a capital murder trial in which several of the most powerful forms of memory distortion were present (e.g., phantom recollections, robust interrogation methods that stimulate false self-incrimination). A key question before the jury, whether to regard the defendant's confession as true or false, turned on a theoretical principle that is used to explain memory distortion in the laboratory, the verbatim–gist distinction, and on research showing that it is possible to create false memories that embody the gist of experience. The scientific testimony focused on instances in which false gist memories had been created under controlled conditions (e.g., of having been lost in a mall, of receiving surgery for a fictitious injury), as well as on real-life examples of false memory for the gist experience (e.g., recovered memories of sexual abuse, alien abduction memories). The defendant was found innocent of capital murder.

Cynthia J. Najdowski: Psi Chi/APA Edwin B. Newman Graduate Research Award.

Presents a short biography of the winner of the American Psychological Association's Psi Chi/APA Edwin B. Newman Graduate Research Award. The 2012 winner is Cynthia J. Najdowski for an outstanding research paper that examines how jurors' judgments are influenced by a juvenile defendant's confession and status as intellectually disabled. Through the use of a mock trial experiment, the research revealed that jurors discounted a juvenile's coerced confession and sometimes used intellectual disability as a mitigating factor. Attribution theory and the discounting principle were used to identify the psychological mechanisms underlying this effect. The paper, titled 'Understanding Jurors' Judgments in Cases Involving Juvenile Defendants,' was published in Psychology, Public Policy, and Law in October 2011 and was the basis for Najdowski's selection as the recipient of the 2012 Psi Chi/APA Edwin B. Newman Graduate Research Award. Bette L. Bottoms, PhD, served as faculty supervisor. Najdowski's Award citation and a selected bibliography are also presented.

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

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.

Use of Deception in Obtaining a Confession

Back to table of contents Previous article Next article LetterFull AccessLetterAbraham L. Halpern M.D.Abraham L. Halpern M.D.Search for more papers by this authorPublished Online:1 Jun 2009https://doi.org/10.1176/ps.2009.60.6.850AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail Use of Deception in Obtaining a ConfessionTo the Editor: In his column in the April issue, Dr. Appelbaum clearly tells us that a defendant's confession that is obtained by deception on the part of law enforcement agents is admissible as evidence, notwithstanding the deception ( 1 ). However, simply because deception in obtaining a confession is not illegal does not make it permissible for a psychiatrist to assist the police under such circumstances. I would like to remind colleagues that the American Psychiatric Association's position is absolutely firm that psychiatrists should not participate in the interrogation of persons held in custody by law enforcement authorities ( 2 ). Dr. Halpern is professor emeritus of psychiatry at New York Medical College, New York City.

Letter

Back to table of contents Previous article Next article LetterFull AccessLetterAbraham L. Halpern M.D.Abraham L. Halpern M.D.Search for more papers by this authorPublished Online:1 Jun 2009https://doi.org/10.1176/ps.2009.60.6.850AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail Use of Deception in Obtaining a ConfessionTo the Editor: In his column in the April issue, Dr. Appelbaum clearly tells us that a defendant's confession that is obtained by deception on the part of law enforcement agents is admissible as evidence, notwithstanding the deception ( 1 ). However, simply because deception in obtaining a confession is not illegal does not make it permissible for a psychiatrist to assist the police under such circumstances. I would like to remind colleagues that the American Psychiatric Association's position is absolutely firm that psychiatrists should not participate in the interrogation of persons held in custody by law enforcement authorities ( 2 ). Dr. Halpern is professor emeritus of psychiatry at New York Medical College, New York City.

Effects of false‐evidence ploys and expert testimony on jurors' verdicts, recommended sentences, and perceptions of confession evidence

During interrogations, police may use false-evidence ploys or fabricated claims to convince suspects to confess. Mock jurors read trial materials containing interrogation transcripts with or without a false-evidence ploy and one of two expert witness conditions (present or absent). We examined jurors' verdicts, recommended sentences, and perceptions of the interrogation. Although factual evidence and the defendant's confession remained constant across conditions, false-evidence ploys led to fewer convictions and shorter sentences. Jurors also perceived interrogations with ploys as more deceptive and coercive. Expert testimony reduced convictions and increased interrogation deception and coercion ratings. Across ploy types, participants rated demeanor ploys as less deceptive and recommended longer sentences for confessors. Outcomes reveal important, previously unrecognized consequences of false-evidence ploys.

Art, Science, and Witchcraft in Early Modern Holland: Jacques de Gheyn II (1565-1629) (review)

Reviewed by: Art, Science, and Witchcraft in Early Modern Holland: Jacques de Gheyn II (1565-1629) Hans de Waardt Claudia Swan . Art, Science, and Witchcraft in Early Modern Holland: Jacques de Gheyn II (1565–1629). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Pp. xvii + 254. What is real and what fantasy? Where lies the boundary between the perception of nature and illusion? The Dutch engraver and painter Jacques de Gheyn II excelled both in the exact depiction of natural objects and in fanciful drawings and engravings about witches and demonic figures. In this book Claudia Swan examines his aims in rendering reality in these two genres, and what reality meant to him and the people among whom he worked. De Gheyn (1565–1629), styled "the second" to distinguish him from his father and son who had the same name, was born in Antwerp. In 1585, at the age of twenty, he settled in Haarlem, where Hendrick Goltzius instructed him in the art of engraving. Between 1590 and 1595 he lived in Amsterdam. He then moved to the university town of Leiden, and in 1603 he finally settled in nearby The Hague, the administrative center of the Dutch Republic. At that time the University of Leiden had, after a hesitant start in 1575, evolved into a major center of erudite learning and latitudinarian thinking. This offered the young artist ideal surroundings in which to perfect his skills in scientific materialism. Soon, his ability to depict herbs and flowers found in places like the university's new botanical garden was highly valued. Yet he not only depicted the plants there, but also the garden itself. Pieter Pauw, professor of anatomy and botany, was portrayed by De Gheyn in a rather theatrical depiction during an anatomical lecture and also in the course of his instructions in the garden. In this period De Gheyn also made minute drawings of insects and small animals. [End Page 230] Just after the turn of the century, however, he shifted much of his attention to a highly imaginary theme, namely, that of witchcraft. Illustrative of this transition is a pen and ink drawing he made in 1602–3, which contain both a detailed depiction of a hermit crab and a witchcraft scene. This conspicuous development, of course, provokes the question about the way in which De Gheyn perceived such preternatural activities. To solve this problem, Swan discusses the views of Dutch painters and critics concerning the possibility of representing nature realistically in works of art, to work nae het leven as the Dutch put it (i.e., from life), which was De Gheyn's position in this field. In the second part of her book, she shifts to De Gheyn's witches, and in the final chapter she proposes a balanced judgment on the degree to which the artist aimed at rendering a realistic image in the two genres he pursued. I find Swan's analysis very convincing. She is clearly well informed about the contemporaneous discussion concerning the degree to which realism is possible in art. She is also well versed in the—in so many ways very complicated—situation in the Dutch Republic. Her fluency in Dutch is certainly of great value here. An element of major importance is the fact that De Gheyn made this shift toward witchcraft scenes just in the period when it was becoming progressively difficult in the Netherlands to prosecute witches. In 1593 and 1594 the highest judicial authorities of the provinces Holland and Zeeland had rendered verdicts that made it impossible from then on to apply torture or the water test in such cases. The other five provinces soon adopted this new jurisprudence. From then on, it was only possible to convict somebody for witchcraft if the defendant's confession had been obtained without the use of torture. As a matter of fact, the last witch to be executed in the Republic, in 1608, had given such a voluntary statement. In 1594 the Court of Holland and Zeeland banned the water test on the advice of the professors of medicine and philosophy of the University of Leiden. On the court's request they had given it a disquisition that was clearly modeled...

Exhuming the Body of the Corpus Delicti Rule

The Corpus Delicti Rule prohibits the introduction of the defendant's confession to a crime to count as evidence against the defendant in the absence of independent evidence of the crime in question. The common law rule, designed to protect the defendant who confesses to the commission of a fictitious crime, has fallen out of favor with federal courts and a number of state courts. Moreover, the rule has its academic detractors. This essay is an attempt to investigate the value of the rule, the academic criticisms of the rule and to analyze the federal substitute for the rule. If the analysis is not completely astray, the rule serves a most admirable social purpose. The academic arguments are not so telling as to justify jettisoning the rule. Finally, the federal rule is argued to be either completely inadequate a protection or an adequate protection only to the extent that the federal substitute is coextensive with the rule it is designed to replace, namely, the original Corpus Delicti Rule.

Roma Rights, Roma Wrongs

SEVERAL YEARS AGO, a Western law-enforcement adviser working in Romania-a country where police abuse has been widely reported noticed a common explanation for the country's astronomically high conviction rate: nearly every prosecution commenced with the defendant's confession. All the more surprising, then, that one of the nation's most infamous crimes-a 1993 case in which a raging mob in the town of Hadareni murdered three men and burned down more than a dozen homes-was stymied in the courts. No indictment. No trial. reason, as the local mayor made clear at the time: the victims were Gypsies, and prosecution of their killers would not have been popular. Today, after more than eight years of international pressure and several protracted court proceedings, the families of the Hadareni victims are still waiting for justice. And Romania hardly enjoys a monopoly on impunity for violence against Roma (the name many Gypsies use for themselves). Throughout much of Europe, Roma are among the most hated, misunderstood, and mistreated of people. Their renown as musicians, dancers, and palm-readers is surpassed only by the near-universal belief among the Gadze or non-Roma-that Gypsies are also liars, thieves, and cheats. Robert Jordan, the sympathetic hero of Hemingway's For Whom the Bell Tolls, could have been speaking for many contemporary Europeans when he said, The gypsy ... is truly worthless. He has

The Consequences of False Confessions: Deprivations of Liberty and Miscarriages of Justice in the Age of Psychological Interrogation

This article studies the precise impact that false confessions have on criminal defendants. Using evidence from sixty cases of police-induced false confessions in which the defendant's confession is not supported by any physical or reliable inculpatory evidence, the authors explore the impact of unreliable confession evidence on criminal justice officials, the jurors and the criminal justice system. The article demonstrates that a trier of fact may be so biased by a false confession that it will likely favor prosecution and conviction despite strong evidence of innocence, often leading to a defendant's incarceration and even death. Additionally, the article finds that, despite Miranda, contemporary law enforcement personnel continue to employ coercive and manipulative methods.To prevent miscarriages of justice caused by false confessions, prosecutors, judges, and juries should carefully scrutinize and evaluate a suspect's post-admission narrative against the known facts of the crime. The article also asserts that mandatory video- or audio-recording of police interrogations would greatly decrease the risk of harm caused by false confessions by reducing the use of psychologically coercive interrogation methods.