BerandaDuring a recent lecture, I showed an excerpt from the Michael Crowe Interrogation to my psychology class. The goal was to illustrate the psychological fragmentation associated to a child that confesses to a murder that he did not commit. Students from the course astoundingly questioned the features associated to false confessions among this population and I am providing a discussion below that expounds upon the problematic concerns pertaining to juvenile confessions and why such incidents occur.
The most important question to a homicide is who is the perpetrator? The next most important would probably be why was this crime committed? Lastly, it is important how the crime was committed to be sure the evidence, methodology, motivation, victim selection, and other aspects corroborate with the suspect to make a case. The answer that law enforcement personnel are not typically seeking is that of a false confession or admission to perpetration, but such a happening does take place for several reasons, especially among children and juveniles.
The three predominant psychological categories that accompany false confessions (Gudjonsson & MacKeith, 1990; Kassin & Wrightsman, 1985; Kassin, 1997) include: (a) voluntary false confessions, (b) coerced compliant false confessions, and (c) coerced internalized false confessions. The voluntary false confession does not pertain to external pressures in admitting culpability for a crime; however, the coerced compliant false confession is due to the coerciveness that occurs during the interrogation process. The coerced internalized false confession is when the individual is made to believe that they committed the offense, with no memory of it because they are actually innocent (as cited in Ruiz, 2001).
There are approximately eight predominantly false confession typologies that are applicable to the children and adolescent interrogation process. The first typology is identified as Altruistic. In the altruistic confession, the individual does not believe that they committed the offense but they are possibly motivated to protect someone else through their erroneous admission.
The second typology is identified as Opportunistic. This is when the individual once again does not believe that they committed the offense but they seem to take the opportunity to admit to the offense as a means of desperation in protecting themselves from further harm that may accompany the prosecutorial process (Ruiz, 2001).
The third typology in false confessions is that of Notoriety Seeking in which the child or adolescent does not believe that they committed the offense but are susceptible to false admission due to the attention received from doing so. Such individuals usually have self-esteem issues and display anti-social behaviorisms.
The fourth typology is that of Sadistic, prevalent more so in adults versus children and adolescents, in which once again the individual does not believe they are culpable but they desire to inflict a form of psychological distress among the interrogator. This individual is cognizant of their innocence but falsely admits to crime commission based on the psychological need for attention, neurotically manipulating the entire investigation and representing control (Ruiz, 2001).
The fifth typology in false confessions is that Capitulation in which the individual being interviewed does not believe that they committed the offense but the interrogation process becomes psychologically overbearing and even forceful. Through a desperate act to protect themselves, they will admit crime commission just as a means to alleviate the pressures associated to the interrogation process. These individuals are rather interesting because the individual does not believe that they are guilty and they do not voluntarily confess but rather end up confessing because there is some type of reward or compensation that has been perceived to exist in exchange for a false admission. Such rewards could include a lesser sentence, ceasing the interrogation, sleep, food, and even going home. This form of confession is found to be prominent among children and adolescents (Ruiz, 2001).
The sixth typology in false confessions is that of Internal Guilt. This is when an individual believes that they are guilty of committing the offense and choose to falsely confess to the crime because they have an overwhelming sense of guilt and psychologically have the need to overcompensate for their wrongful disposition and should be punished for the crime as well. This may be referred to as pathological guilt.
The seventh typology in false confessions is that of Delusional. According to Gudjonsson (1992), this typology pertains to individuals that have a difficult time distinguishing between reality and fantasy. The individuals in this category suffer from some form of psychopathology in which they are constantly harassed by delusional thoughts of paranoia and end up confessing to a crime that they did not actually commit (as cited in Ruiz, 2001).
The eighth and final typology in false confessions is that of Convinced. This is when an individual believes that they are guilty of committing the offense because they believe during the interrogation process that they are the perpetrator. The interesting aspect here is that they admit to having no prior memory of committing the crime. Such an altercation is referred to as the memory distrust syndrome (Gudjonsson, 1992) and the individual is bewildered as the technique of source misattribution (Ceci & Bruck, 1993) is utilized to by the individual because they are unable to appropriately recall the events that took place (as cited in Ruiz, 2001).
There are several risk factors associated to false confessions to include: (a) age and overall developmental maturity, (b) heightened level of suggestibility, (c) poor recall in memory and lower intelligence, (d) poor assertiveness, (e) heightened anxiety levels, (f) lack of coping strategies or mechanisms, (g) knowing that negative feedback was given during the interrogation process, (h) having a history of high compliance with authority figures, (i) acute withdrawal from substances, (j) the absence of an attorney or adult present and no prior involvement within the justice system, and (k) the utilization of intimidation, manipulation, challenge, and leading questions utilized by the interrogator (Ruiz, 2001).
In closing, it should be noted that juveniles are more susceptible to providing false confessions to crimes due to their submissive social role to be subordinate to adult authority figures. Such a perception is both sociologically and psychologically constructed and when the authority figure proffers to behave in an authoritarian manner (Kaban & Tobey, 1999; Reed, 1996) juveniles find it arduous to deviate from the preconceived facts that interrogators at times suggest or fabricate to obtain the all important confession of a crime.
Reference
Ruiz, A. (2201). Problematic confessions in children and adolescents. In N.G. Ribner, The handbook of juvenile forensic psychology (pp. 58-76). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
The most important question to a homicide is who is the perpetrator? The next most important would probably be why was this crime committed? Lastly, it is important how the crime was committed to be sure the evidence, methodology, motivation, victim selection, and other aspects corroborate with the suspect to make a case. The answer that law enforcement personnel are not typically seeking is that of a false confession or admission to perpetration, but such a happening does take place for several reasons, especially among children and juveniles.
The three predominant psychological categories that accompany false confessions (Gudjonsson & MacKeith, 1990; Kassin & Wrightsman, 1985; Kassin, 1997) include: (a) voluntary false confessions, (b) coerced compliant false confessions, and (c) coerced internalized false confessions. The voluntary false confession does not pertain to external pressures in admitting culpability for a crime; however, the coerced compliant false confession is due to the coerciveness that occurs during the interrogation process. The coerced internalized false confession is when the individual is made to believe that they committed the offense, with no memory of it because they are actually innocent (as cited in Ruiz, 2001).
There are approximately eight predominantly false confession typologies that are applicable to the children and adolescent interrogation process. The first typology is identified as Altruistic. In the altruistic confession, the individual does not believe that they committed the offense but they are possibly motivated to protect someone else through their erroneous admission.
The second typology is identified as Opportunistic. This is when the individual once again does not believe that they committed the offense but they seem to take the opportunity to admit to the offense as a means of desperation in protecting themselves from further harm that may accompany the prosecutorial process (Ruiz, 2001).
The third typology in false confessions is that of Notoriety Seeking in which the child or adolescent does not believe that they committed the offense but are susceptible to false admission due to the attention received from doing so. Such individuals usually have self-esteem issues and display anti-social behaviorisms.
The fourth typology is that of Sadistic, prevalent more so in adults versus children and adolescents, in which once again the individual does not believe they are culpable but they desire to inflict a form of psychological distress among the interrogator. This individual is cognizant of their innocence but falsely admits to crime commission based on the psychological need for attention, neurotically manipulating the entire investigation and representing control (Ruiz, 2001).
The fifth typology in false confessions is that Capitulation in which the individual being interviewed does not believe that they committed the offense but the interrogation process becomes psychologically overbearing and even forceful. Through a desperate act to protect themselves, they will admit crime commission just as a means to alleviate the pressures associated to the interrogation process. These individuals are rather interesting because the individual does not believe that they are guilty and they do not voluntarily confess but rather end up confessing because there is some type of reward or compensation that has been perceived to exist in exchange for a false admission. Such rewards could include a lesser sentence, ceasing the interrogation, sleep, food, and even going home. This form of confession is found to be prominent among children and adolescents (Ruiz, 2001).
The sixth typology in false confessions is that of Internal Guilt. This is when an individual believes that they are guilty of committing the offense and choose to falsely confess to the crime because they have an overwhelming sense of guilt and psychologically have the need to overcompensate for their wrongful disposition and should be punished for the crime as well. This may be referred to as pathological guilt.
The seventh typology in false confessions is that of Delusional. According to Gudjonsson (1992), this typology pertains to individuals that have a difficult time distinguishing between reality and fantasy. The individuals in this category suffer from some form of psychopathology in which they are constantly harassed by delusional thoughts of paranoia and end up confessing to a crime that they did not actually commit (as cited in Ruiz, 2001).
The eighth and final typology in false confessions is that of Convinced. This is when an individual believes that they are guilty of committing the offense because they believe during the interrogation process that they are the perpetrator. The interesting aspect here is that they admit to having no prior memory of committing the crime. Such an altercation is referred to as the memory distrust syndrome (Gudjonsson, 1992) and the individual is bewildered as the technique of source misattribution (Ceci & Bruck, 1993) is utilized to by the individual because they are unable to appropriately recall the events that took place (as cited in Ruiz, 2001).
There are several risk factors associated to false confessions to include: (a) age and overall developmental maturity, (b) heightened level of suggestibility, (c) poor recall in memory and lower intelligence, (d) poor assertiveness, (e) heightened anxiety levels, (f) lack of coping strategies or mechanisms, (g) knowing that negative feedback was given during the interrogation process, (h) having a history of high compliance with authority figures, (i) acute withdrawal from substances, (j) the absence of an attorney or adult present and no prior involvement within the justice system, and (k) the utilization of intimidation, manipulation, challenge, and leading questions utilized by the interrogator (Ruiz, 2001).
In closing, it should be noted that juveniles are more susceptible to providing false confessions to crimes due to their submissive social role to be subordinate to adult authority figures. Such a perception is both sociologically and psychologically constructed and when the authority figure proffers to behave in an authoritarian manner (Kaban & Tobey, 1999; Reed, 1996) juveniles find it arduous to deviate from the preconceived facts that interrogators at times suggest or fabricate to obtain the all important confession of a crime.
Reference
Ruiz, A. (2201). Problematic confessions in children and adolescents. In N.G. Ribner, The handbook of juvenile forensic psychology (pp. 58-76). San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
0 comments:
Post a Comment