Download
1 / 55
E N D
Interview and interrogation DVD: Stephanie Crowe\Video projects\Baltimore arson\Baltimore arson.wmv...\bakersfield child sex ring\john stoll.wmv...\Wenatcheee child sex ring\appeal audio.wmv\Wrongful arrest,conviction\FBI Portland case.wmv\Amy Yates.wmv\Fitsimmons released.wmv\Douglas Warney.wmv\Ozem Goldwire.wav...\Canada\Drop the knife\Interrogation\juvy murd sus.wmv\Children as victims\made it all up.wmv\Ethics\Duke players sue.wmv
What is a “witness?” • Anyone with personal knowledge (saw, heard, felt, smelled) of any fact or circumstance, including things that happened, words said, the presence of documents and other tangible items, that can help prove or disprove that an offense was planned or committed, that someone participated or had a motive or opportunity, or that physical or documentary evidence exists • A person is still considered a “witness” if what they have to say furnishes investigative leads but is inadmissible in court
Conventional interview • Warm-up period • Identify the witness • Inform the witness about the subject of the interview • Place witness at ease, reduce anxiety • Main body of interview • Use open-ended questions (“what happened?”, “what did you see next?”) • Phrase questions positively (e.g., “how fast was the car going?”), not suggestively (“was the car doing about fifty?”) • Keep questions brief and narrowly focused • Place questions systematically, if possible in chronological order • Wrap-up • At the end go over the answers • Ask if anything was left out
Structured interview – Frazee three-step process • Respondent tells the story in their own way • Take notes • Minimize interruptions • If must clarify, repeat what the respondent said, phrasing it as a question • Officer uses notes to guide the respondent in retelling the story chronologically (step by step) • Take notes • Maintain a logical sequence • Focus on the important aspects (what may be evidence) • Challenge respondent when necessary • Bring up missed topics but don’t suggest what to say • Officer reads back finalized notes • Encourage challenges to your retelling • Make corrections and read them back for concurrence
Frazee three-step interview process -- residential burglary -- officer’s report On _____________ I interviewed Joe (or) Trudy Smith, 123 Elm St., Los Angeles. He/she said as follows: Ms. Smith lives at this home with her husband, Joe and their son, Steven. On _____ she left for work at 8:00 am, locking the house. Her husband had already left. She returned at 6:00 pm and discovered the burglary. Her son was present. He supposedly arrived about 5:30 pm, after football practice, but waited for her to call police. Ms. Smith observed muddy footprints leading from the living room window, which was open. The window was not damaged but she does not know if it had been locked. Their upstairs bedroom was ransacked. Missing property includes a new Philips DVD changer, value $500, which was kept on a shelf downstairs, and a jewelry box, normally kept on the bureau, in her upstairs bedroom. Also missing are items from the jewelry box, including a diamond cocktail ring valued at $3,000. Ms. Smith suspects that her son’s friend, Josh, may be involved. Josh is given run of the house by her son. Ms. Smith believes that Josh has been in juvenile hall for theft. According to Ms. Smith, Josh is not on the football team.
Cognitive interview • Purpose is to enhance recall • Technique and its purpose described to the witness • Be careful not to suggest anything • Do not stress the witness’s importance • Steps • Witness describes the physical environment where the incident took place • Witness reports his feelings and reactions • Witness mentions everything they can remember • Witness recalls events in a different order • Witness reports incident from another person’s point of view
Terminology and admissibility • Interview or interrogation? • Interview a witness / interrogate a suspect • Legally there is no distinction unless a person is in custody (i.e., “custodial interrogation” -- see next slide) • Admission or confession? • Confession: as to all elements of a crime • Admission: something less
Custodial interrogation • Miranda v. Arizona (1966) • Purposes • To discourage police from using coercion • To prevent involuntary confessions • Requirements: If person is in custody they must be advised of: • Right to counsel (Sixth Amendment) • Privilege against self-incrimination (Fifth Amendment) • When is interrogation “custodial”? • When freedom of movement is significantly restricted. Stop-and-frisk is inherently custodial. • U.S. v. Kim (9th. Circuit, 2002): Being detained during a search warrant can be enough. • U.S. v. Hayden (9th. Circuit, 2001): It’s what the suspect thinks that is important
Non-custodial situations • U.S. v. Bassignani (9th. Circuit, 2009): Suspect questioned in a conference room while officers served a search warrant at his place of work. Because officers were cordial, told him he wasn’t under arrest and pressure was low, Court said Miranda warning was not required. • Special rules once judicial process is invoked • Whether or not subjects are in custody, if formal charges have been brought (e.g., complaint filed, arrest warrant issued, indictment returned) subjects must be informed of their right to counsel before being interviewed outside their attorney’s presence • In Montejo v. Louisiana (2009) Supreme Court overturned a prior decision that prohibited such interviews altogether • Under Massiah v. U.S. (1964) undercover work or surreptitious surveillance is generally useless once the judicial process is invoked (target must be informed of right to counsel) • Note: Only exception is that can use such statements for purposes of impeachment
Voluntariness and “shock theconscience” • Bram v. U.S. (1897): Confession must be voluntary – not obtained by direct or implied promise or improper influence, such as the “force of hope or fear”. • Brown v. Mississippi (1936): Beating some to make them confess (a) shocks the conscience and (b) makes confessions involuntary. • Ashcraft v. Tennessee (1944): Whether police interrogation “shocks the conscience” depends on the “totality of the circumstances”. • Rochin v. California (1953): Police behavior that “shocks the conscience” is a violation of the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In this case officers choked a suspect who was swallowing pills, and when unsuccessful had his stomach pumped out. • Frazier v. Cupp (1969). A continuous, “relentless” 36-hour interrogation is illegal.
Voluntariness/“shock the conscience” violations • Leyra v. Denno (1954): Defendant, suffering from severe sinus condition, is relentlessly interrogated. A doctor (really a psychiatrist) sent in to “help” skillfully breaks down the defendant’s will by, among other things, telling him how much better he would feel if he confessed. • Spano v. New York (1959): Defendant confesses to a close friend, a police cadet. He then confesses again to detectives after being repeatedly begged by his friend, who says that if the defendant does not talk he (the cadet) will get in trouble and his wife and kids would suffer. • Rogers v. Richmond (1961): After prolonged interrogation defendant confesses when officers threaten to arrest his sick wife. Supreme Court ruled the confession inadmissible because it was not free and voluntary, but made under the influence of a promise or threat. • Doody v. Schriro (2008): Relentless twelve-hour, overnight interrogation of a 17-year old by tag-teams of officers where parents were not present, Miranda warnings were given but “downplayed,” and questioning turned “menacing” and “coercive”. Reaffirmed 5/4/2011
Interviewing children and juveniles • Blurry line between right and wrong, between reality and fantasy • Children concentrate on the present • Want to resolve immediate problems • Don’t think ahead or consider the consequences for others • Easily influenced and manipulated • Want to please adults • Unsophisticated, little life experience • Don’t understand the CJ system • Assume that police and adults will do the right thing • Don’t understand adult needs and motivations • Don’t appreciate the seriousness of their situation • Believe that everything will turn out OK once their parents or guardians become involved
Four-year old lies -- precisely --about an abduction attempt • On 11/20/07 OCSD deputies deployed eight carsand spent hours searching for a man a four-year oldsaid tried to kidnap her from a Midway City park. • The girl described her assailant precisely, saying that he had spiked hair and a dragon tattoo. Deputies placed a neighbor who fit that description under observation. They also detained another person. • She later said it was all a lie, told because she was upset that her mother left her alone while she went to see someone. • A Sheriff’s spokesperson said they were stunned that a young child could give such vivid -- and false -- details: • "In 28 years in law enforcement, I have never had a 4-year-old make up a story like this. It says something about what television is doing to our children." • Perhaps the Sheriff’s Department can send someone to take this class?
'I felt everyone knew I was lying. But myparents said, "You're doing fine.Don't worry." And everyone was saying howproud they were of me.' On 10/30/05 the L.A. Times Magazine published a long, heart-felt apology from Kyle Sapp, who as an eight-year-old was one of several hundred children who said they had been forced by the owner and employees of the McMartin preschool in Manhattan Beach to participate in an untold number of lurid sex acts. According to Kyle, it was all untrue. His family was very dysfunctional and he was always looking for praise. So he simply told his parents and the interviewers at Children’s Institute International what they obviously wanted to hear. He knew that lawyers wanted a consistent account, so he put a lot of pressure on himself to provide just that. ‘I don’t think they thought I was telling the truth, just that I was telling the same stories consistently, doing what needed to be done to get these teachers judged guilty.’
Youth statements and recantations: who’s on first? In 2004 an 8-year old girl wasstrangled to death in the Georgiatrailer park where she lived. Atroubled 12-year old neighbor boyconfessed. He later retracted hisconfession, alleging that police hadrelentlessly interrogated him forseveral hours. In 1995 he enteredinto a plea agreement and receivedtwo years in a juvenile facility. In February 2006 a mentally disturbed 18-year old said he, not the 12-year old, was the real killer. This new confession seemed credible because the victim was heading towards his residence when she disappeared. He also gave police intimate details of the crime. But then he also recanted. The victim’s parents are convinced that the 18-year old is the real killer and have apologized to the 12-year old’s family. The police disagree; however, a grand jury indicted the 18-year old, leading to the original suspect’s release. A trial is pending.
2004 Garden Grove drifter: "He grabbed my hair and then he startedpulling me. And that's when I screamed. I tried to go away, and thenmy friends were trying to help me, and that's when he startedchoking me.“ As Eric Nordmark sat on trial in Santa Ana for molestingthree girls, he was convinced that his accuser had been assaulted bysomeone. But he was wrong. In jail since May 2003, Nordmark wasfreed after the girls admitted they made it all up to avoid being punished for coming home late. The girls were prosecuted in juvenile court and will be on probation until age 21. 1984 McMartin case: Interviewing techniques implanted false memories of sexual abuse into scores of children who attended a Manhattan Beach day-care. The case soon fell apart. Of the seven employees indicted, only two were tried and both were acquitted. The Bakersfield 46: In May 2004 a Kern Countyjudge declared John Stoll innocent after the manserved eighteen years in prison for allegedlyleading a cabal of Bakersfield child molesters.The last of forty-six defendants in a string ofput-up cases, Stoll’s luck turned during twotearful, in-court recantations, including one by a26-year old man whose false statements sent hisown mother to prison for six years.
The Wenatchee “child sex ring” • Between 1994-5 forty-three adults were arrested on “horrific tales” of sexually abusing sixty children in Wenatchee. Eighteen were convicted. The investigation was initiated by Wenatchee police detective Bob Perez and joined by State child protective services. Prosecutions were based on interviews with the children and confessions obtained by Perez and his colleagues. • Among those charged with multiple counts of child rape and molestation were several church members: • Pastor Robert Roberson and his wife, Connie; • Honnah Sims, a Sunday-school teacher; • Harold and Idella Everett, two developmentally disabled parishioners. They were accused by their two children, both of whom were living with foster parents: Detective Bob Perez and his wife • Others arrested and prosecuted include: Idella Everett • Carol and Mark Doggett. They were arrested on 1,000 counts of rape after they asked for police and CPS help in dealing with their troubled son; • Michael Rose, a laborer, on 336 counts of child rape • And on...and on...and on
Child victim interviews • Many of the victims had a history of making “outrageous” claims of sexual abuse. Others had actually been abused by blood relatives. When they repeated the same accusations against new foster parents they were taken at face value. • After making inconsistent statements filled with “pornographic fiction” to investigators, many children recanted. Their recantations were ignored. • Twenty-nine children were sent for prolonged stays at Pine Crest, a seedy Idaho psychiatric hospital that offered special interrogation techniques. • The detective and CPS workers routinely threw away interview notes. • Things suspects said were purposely twisted by investigators • Statements favorable to the defendants were withheld from their lawyers • Prosecutors filed charges on literally every case brought to them • Judges rejected defense requests to allow expert testimony about false memory syndrome
Two kids taken to Pine Crest Sarah Doggett (r), 16, was forcibly taken to Pine Crest by CPS officials, who said she was “suicidal”: “Why did almost all my treatment at Pine Crest deal with me having to remember sexual abuse that never happened? Jessica Cunningham, 17, had previously spent time at Pine Crest. She was sent there by her parents for behavioral problems. Jessica said that the detective and CPS pressed her to say that “my parents did things to me and to my sisters...and if I didn't, I wouldn't get out of Pine Crest...They had their own ideas of what happened in my family. When I disagreed and said they were wrong, they said I was lying. I was hiding the hiding the truth.... I had to remember. I had to talk. Disclosure would make me feel better. It just never ended...I was a prisoner....” Jessica’s mother, Connie, was convicted and got 46 years. She and her daughter later reunited and now live in California.
Defendant interviews • “The more I said I didn’t do any of the things [the detective] said I did the angrier he got....He told me I was going to jail for the rest of my life or I could go home, I could have my son back, if I gave him a statement. I said whatever he wanted me to say, just to have it over....” (Got 16 ½ years) • “I asked, ‘can I have an attorney’? He says ‘no, there’s no need for one to be present because we’re just questioning you.’....I wasn’t sure what I was signing because I was flabbergasted.” (Alcoholic, IQ of 73) • “My state of mind when I signed the confession was that I wanted to get out of there and get away from him....[The detective told her she was not a suspect]....I wanted to go home to my own bed, my own house, my own kids. He made promises that I could go if I just signed. What a liar.” (Woman. As an infant, she lost a leg to a hog. Plea bargained, got 40 years.) • “I kept saying ‘no, no, no, no. I want an attorney.’ But he said ‘you don’t need one because you are only a witness’.” (Mother of four, barely literate, had the detective read her the confession. Turned down a plea bargain, was convicted by jury, got 23 years.)
Outcomes • The detective no longer works there • Of the eighteen convicted, all have been released • Most convictions were overturned. Some pleas were accepted and entered on lesser, “usually unrelated” charges • Many lawsuits were filed by the defendants: • In December 1999 the State settled with the Robersons and Honnah Sims for $850,000 • In November 2000 Chelan County settled with Roberson, who previously won over $200,000 in damages from a Federal jury • On Sept. 30, 2001, a Spokane County jury found Wenatchee and Douglas County negligent in the investigation of six plaintiffs, including Sims and Roberson. They awarded $3 million to Honnah Sims and her husband. Play audio
The Murder of Stephanie Crowe On the morning of January 21, 1998,Stephanie Crowe, 12, was found stabbed to deathin her Escondido home. None of the otherresidents – her parents, grandmother, sister andbrother – said they heard anything during thenight. Police immediately focused on three youths – her brother Michael, 14, and two friends, Aaron Houser and Joshua Treadway. Four days later they picked up Michael Crowe. He at first denied having anything to do with his sister’s death. But during a relentless six-hour session the next day, in which detectives concocted stories about finding his sister’s blood in his room, Crowe finally confessed although in a most peculiar way – by saying that, yes, he did it and that, yes, he was making it up. Escondido police then picked up Joshua Treadway. After being threatened with prison and subjected to two grueling interrogations, including a ten-hour session in which police administered a voice stress analysis, Treadway said he acted as a lookout while Crowe and Houser did the deed. Aaron Houser maintained his innocence throughout.
Certain that the crime was solved, prosecutors pointed to thethree teens’ love of fantasy role-playing games and Michael’sadmitted jealousy of his popular sister. The boys were quicklyindicted. But a judge later threw out all of Crowe’s confessionand most of Treadway’s, ruling that both teens had beencoerced. So the defense dredged up questionable forensictestimony. “Expert” witnesses offered to testify that a knifefound under Treadway’s bed was “identical” to the weaponthat inflicted the fatal wounds, that the killing could not havebeen committed by only one person, and that the words “kill, kill” left on the victim’s windowsill could have been written by Michael Crowe. An FBI crime scene profile strongly suggested that the crime was an inside job. Still, there were many inconsistencies. To have participated in the killing Treadway had to have snuck out of his home in the middle of the night and made the ten-mile roundtrip journey on foot. It simply didn’t add up. And there was something else...
Hours before the murder the Crowe’s neighborsspotted Richard Tuite, a 28-year old schizophrenicwith a record for drug and property crimes. Tuitehad past arrests for burglary, a stabbing and forleering at young girls and following them home.Tuite, who was roaming the area, stood on thevictim’s property and looked up at the windows.But by the time that an officer arrived Tuite wasnowhere to be seen. As the officer left he radioed in that he saw the Crowe’s laundry-room door closing. The next day officers brought Tuite to the police station, where they took his clothing and fingernail scrapings. Tuite was cooperative and was let go. Defense attorneys examined Tuite’s clothing. Spotting suspicious stains, they asked they be tested. Detectives, who pooh-poohed Tuite’s ability to commit the crime, said they did so and found nothing. But the defense persevered and Tuite’s things were sent for DNA analysis.
Six months after their arrest a judge held overthe three boys for trial as adults. But the judgewarned prosecutors that their evidence waswholly lacking. He also wondered why Tuitehad been dismissed as a suspect. The boyswere released to the custody of their parents. In January 1999, as jury selection for the boy’strial got underway, the crime lab reported that Tuite’s shirt was spattered with Stephanie Crowe’s blood. The boys were freed. Escondido police were replaced by the Sheriff’s office and the State Attorney General’s office took over the prosecution. In May 2003 Tuite was convicted of voluntary manslaughter for Stephanie Crowe’s murder. In August 2004 he was sentenced to thirteen years.
In June 2003 True Crime Publications published“Who Killed Stephanie Crowe: the Anatomy of aMurder Investigation.” The book’s author,Paul E. Tracy, Ph.D., founder and professor at theCrime and Justice Studies Program at University ofTexas at Dallas, claims that the three boys are morelikely than Tuite to have killed Stephanie Crowe.The book’s cover gives source credit to the twoEscondido detectives, now retired, who investigated the case and apparently still believe that the boys did it. One of them,Chris McDonough, is named as the book’s co-author by the“Institute of Investigative Science”, a consulting and training firm where he works. In 2004 Tracy was selected as his university’s “teacher of the year”.
Crowe, Treadway and Houser sued Escondido police, the detectives, and others for Federal civil rights violations (42 USC 1983). A Federal District Court summarily dismissed most of the allegations but refused to grant qualified immunity to the defendants on certain counts. They appealed. On January 14, 2010, the Ninth Circuit reversed some of the District Court’s summary judgments and remanded the case for trial. In particular it held that the interrogations of Crowe, Houser and Treadway were coerced and psychologically damaging, and that the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity because the Constitutional violations should have been apparent. Crowe v. Wrisley (9th. Circuit, no. 05-55467, 1/14/10)
Crowe, Treadway and Houser sued Escondido police, the detectives, and others for Federal civil rights violations (42 USC 1983). A Federal District Court summarily dismissed most of the allegations but refused to grant qualified immunity to the defendants on certain counts. They appealed. On January 14, 2010, the Ninth Circuit reversed some of the District Court’s summary judgments and remanded the case for trial. In particular it held that the interrogations of Crowe, Houser and Treadway were coerced and psychologically damaging, and that the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity because the Constitutional violations should have been apparent. Crowe v. Wrisley (9th. Circuit, no. 05-55467, 1/14/10) In 2011 the Crowes settled for $7.5 million. In 2013 a Federal appeals court ruled that Tuite’s right to cross-examine a prosecution expert had been violated and ordered his retrial. On December 6, 2013 a jury acquitted Tuite, and he was released. Tuite’s lawyer had argued that the blood drops on his clothes were caused by cross-contamination with other crime scene evidence, and that there was otherwise insufficient evidence to convict his client. Source: Los Angeles Times
Codefendants and jailhouse informers • Codefendants often try to get deals for themselves by testifying against each other. • This is often encouraged by police and prosecutors • Since they participated in the same crime, their information can often be corroborated, reducing (but not eliminating) the risk of a wrongful conviction • “Jailhouse informers” are different. These are inmates who claim that another inmate confessed to committing a crime in which the informer was not involved. • Often used in murder cases where evidence is scant • Jailhouse informers testify in exchange for a variety of favors, including reduction in their own sentences, dismissal of charges, furloughs and better housing • False testimony from jailhouse informers is the leading cause of false convictions in capital cases. According to a Northwestern University study, jailhouse informers were involved in half of 111 death-row exonerations since the 70’s • In 2007 Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed a California bill that would require corroboration for statements of jailhouse informers. This bill was based on a recommendation from the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice, a State panel.
When a codefendant lies • In 1983 Hardy and Mark Anthony Reilly were convicted of killing Reilly’s wife and her son in Van Nuys to collect on life insurance. A third conspirator, Calvin Boyd, testified under a grant of immunity that Hardy was the one who plunged knives into the victims while they slept. Hardy got the death penalty. • After the trial other witnesses came forward and swore that Hardy had backed out and that the real killer was Boyd, who avoided being prosecuted for fingering Hardy. There is considerable evidence against Boyd, who witnesses saw with cuts on his hands after the crime. Boyd originally convinced detectives that he was home when the murders took place. • In July 2007 the California Supreme Court ruled that while it was clear that Hardy was at one time in the conspiracy, it was equally clear that he wasn’t the actual killer, and it ordered that he be resentenced.
The most notorious jailhouse informer in US history was in L.A. • In 1989 Leslie White, a jailhouse informer who testified in hundreds of cases on behalf of L.A. County prosecutors admitted that he repeatedly lied. From jail he demonstrated on video how easy it was to pretend to be a police officer and use the phone to get “insider” information from prosecutors on pending cases to make the alleged confessions of other inmates seem plausible. • An investigation into White’s claims revealed that prosecutors had been warned by their peers that White was unreliable but kept using his testimony in court anyways. • White’s admissions led prosecutors to reopen hundreds of cases where jailhouse informers played a role, including many where the death penalty was imposed. • White had been in and out of jails for ten years on a variety of charges. He regularly received unsupervised furloughs and other favors for testifying against other inmates. On his last furlough he beat his wife, pulled a knife on a woman and snatched her purse.
Jailhouse informants – the sadcase of Thomas Goldstein (and maybe theeven sadder case of Tommy Thompson) • In 1980 Tom Goldstein was arrested by Long Beachpolice for shooting to death a man who lived nearby. • An eyewitness identified Goldstein as the killer. • Edward Fink, a notorious jailhouse informant with 3 felonyconvictions testified that Goldstein confessed the crime.Prosecutors never disclosed that they gave Fink a “deal”on new charges in exchange for his testimony. • Similar testimony by Fink led to the 1998 execution ofTommy Thompson for an Orange County murder. • After Goldstein’s conviction the eyewitness recanted hisidentification, saying that police pressured him to pick Goldstein. • Five Federal judges eventually ruled that the conviction was wrongful. Goldstein wound up serving 24 years before he was released in 2004. • In March 2007 the US 9th. Circuit cleared the way for Goldstein’s lawsuit against the D.A. and Long Beach PD. The D.A. was sued for failing to disclose that the informant had a record of getting benefits for testifying. • In January 2009 the US Supreme Court dismissed the D.A.’s office as a defendant, ruling that it was entitled to prosecutorial absolute immunity. • In August 2010 the City of Long Beach paid Goldstein $8 million to settle the lawsuit.
Harsh interrogation techniques:Threats and deception • Threats • Severe punishment • Revocation of probation or parole • Consequences to family and friends • Inducements • Monetary rewards • Leniency on their own cases • Tricks • Defining a situation as non-custodial • Misrepresenting the seriousness of a crime • Psychological tricks (feigning sympathy, blaming the victim) • Fabricating evidence
Harsh interrogation techniques can lead to false confessions • Even intelligent persons have falsely confessed to seek leniency • Many persons don’t understand the CJ process. They don’t appreciate that confessions are hard to “take back” • Persons who falsely confess often falsely implicate others • Particularly vulnerable • Children and juveniles • Less sophisticated • Persons with mental handicaps • Innocent persons with prior records or on probation or parole, who may fear the consequences of being convicted at trial
James Ochoa was arrested for carjacking in 2005 after Buena Park police followed a bloodhound to his home. The dog’s owner was a man who had developed a special device to “sniff” scents from items left behind at a crime scene. Afterwards Ochoa was ID’d by two victims and he was arrested. DNA found on clothing left in the stolen car was not his. On the third day of trial the judge threatened him with life so Ochoa, who had a drug record, pled guilty to a two year term. After serving 10 months the real perpetrator was jailed for another carjacking and his DNA, which was routinely entered into the State database, came up as a match. He confessed. The case of James Ochoa In April 2008 Buena Park police settled Ochoa’s lawsuit for $550,000. Ochoa also collected $31,700 from the State for his false imprisonment. Orange County case mentioned in the Innocence Project
Dennis Rader – the “BTK” case On 2/25/05 Wichita Police arrested Dennis Rader,59, a Park City code enforcement officer, for a stringof ten brutal killings between 1973 and 1991. He hadtaunted authorities by leaving clues and sending notes signed “BTK” (bind, torture, kill). The first two victims were Julie Otero and Kathryn Bright. At the time the killer had not announced himself and police had no reason to suspect a serial murderer. Soon a troubled young person stepped forward, said he committed the murders and implicated two friends. They were arrested and held for trial. In October 1974 the killer wrote a note to authorities claiming responsibility and describing in exacting detail how the killings were committed: "Those three dude you have in custody are just talking to get publicity. They know nothing at all. I did it by myself and no ones help.” Source: Los Angeles Times, 3/6/05
Ozem Goldwire –Autistic Man Falsely Confesses On June 4, 2007 Ozem Goldwire, an autistic man whoconfessed to killing his sister a year earlier was releasedwhen the D.A. concluded that the confession was false. On January 2, 2006 Goldwire came home to find his sisterSherika beaten to death, but police didn’t believe him, andafter hours of questioning and four statements, including avideo in which he denied being responsible, he confessedthat he strangled his sister over an argument about the TV volume. Goldwire told a psychologist that he confessed to please police. “I had no way to get out [of the interrogation] but to lie, I was under so much pressure and was in sheer fright because of their behavior." He easily passed a polygraph. Listen to Ozem Goldwire’s 9-1-1 call
Eddie Joe Lloyd In 1984, while housed in a psychiatric ward, Lloyd confessed to Detroit police that he raped and killed a 16-year old girl. The judge who sentenced Lloyd openly said that he was sorry Michigan did not have a death penalty. Lloyd, now 54, was convicted by a jury and spent 17 years in prison. In 1995 Lloyd saw a TV program about the “Innocence Project”, which has used DNA to free more than 100 falsely convicted persons. Eddie Lloyd became the 110th. Why did he confess to a crime he did not commit? Because he was crazy. He told officers he raped and killed the girl in a misguided attempt to help the police solve a horrible crime. Detroit News investigation
L.A.P.D. Detectives get Mentally HandicappedMan to Incriminate Himself; He Does 12 Years In 1992 four prostitutes were found murdered in South L.A.Detectives searching for the killer interviewed David Jones,a mentally handicapped man with an IQ of 62. Jones was injail for the attempted rape of a prostitute. Through persistent,manipulative interviewing they got Jones to say that he knew theother prostitutes, smoked crack with them, and placed them in chokeholds when they refused to have sex. He denied killing anyone. DNA was recovered from the prostitutes. All the DNA excluded Jones. But he was convicted at trial and got 36 years. The killings continued. In 2001 an LAPD detective working cold cases used DNA to try to solve a string of killings that seemed to be the work of a serial rapist. Geographically profiling an area of South L.A., he used DNA to match ten rape/murders to Chester D. Turner, who was already in prison for rape. These crimes included the rape/murders for which Jones was convicted. In 2004 Jones was exonerated, released and received a settlement of $720,000. Turner was convicted of the eleven rape/murders in May 2007. The real killer –Chester D. Turner
“Recovered” memories are often false memories • Concept that psychological trauma may cause people to repress memories, which can be later recovered using specialized interviewing techniques • Wrongful convictions based on recovered memories have led many psychologists to argue that the process that supposedly “recovers” memories actually implants false memories • Many now consider the entire topic of recovered memory a junk science
Memory is not fixed -- it’s malleable • What can implant false memories? • Guided information (coaching or leading a subject) • Having subjects interpret dreams • Using hypnosis to aid recall • Providing false information • False memories can be implanted unwittingly • Not on purpose but through a flawed interviewing process • False memories can be just as emotional as true memories • Everyone is susceptible to some degree • Children and juveniles particularly susceptible -- they are fearful of not pleasing adults, cannot appreciate consequences of their actions and cannot distinguish between fact and fantasy
UCI Professor Wins Major Award Elizabeth Loftus, Professor of Psychology at UCI,was awarded the $200,000 Grawemyer prize inPsychology for her research debunking repressedmemory syndrome. “The psychologist has shown that people not onlyforget but also falsely remember, meaning that theysincerely and vividly can recall events that never happened when information suggested to them becomes entwined with their memory of what actually happened. She points out that the individual may not be able to separate the real threads of memory from the added strands of suggestion.” Dr. Loftus, a member of the National Academy of Sciences and the American Academy for the Advancement of Science, has consulted on many high-profile criminal cases, including the Oklahoma City Bombing, where the FBI mistakenly arrested an innocent security guard. The creation of false memories video
Polygraph • Belief that deception anxiety physiological symptoms • Brain imaging supposedly shows more activity when persons lie • Some early experiments suggested that the polygraph consistently uncovered liars • Not admissible in criminal courts • Measures • Blood pressure • Heart rate • Respiratory rate • Electrical conductivity of the skin(galvanic skin resistance, or GSR)
Polygraph -technique and applications • Technique • Control questions establish individual baselines • Respondents answer truthfully to some questions • Respondents are directed to lie to others • Baselines compared with responses to questions of interest • Responses that exceed the responses from directed lies suggest deception • Applications • Employee screening • Investigation (see next slide) • Eliminate suspects • Obtain truthful statements (may feel compelled to tell the truth) • Obtain confessions (guilty might so fear the machine they confess to the examiner) • Provide investigative leads
