Interrogations-and-Confessions-Handbook

The Psychology of False Confession: Research and Theoretical Issues 175
Barker, 1961). Furthermore, even when one is specific about the context, such
as false confessions within custodial interrogation, one cannot ignore cultural
factors and fundamental differences in legal systems. For example, Israel’s interrogation
of Palestinians from the occupied territories differs markedly from
custodial interrogation in the UK and USA. With a conviction rate of 96.8%
by Israeli’s military courts, and the main evidence against the defendant being
a signed confession statement, the risk of a false confession should not be
underestimated, particularly when
In fact, the extraction of confessions under duress, and the acceptance into evidence
of such confessions by the military courts, form the backbone of Israel’s
military justice system (Human Rights Watch/Middle East, 1994, p. 2).
Similarly, Morton (2001) gives a vivid description of the Japanese criminal
justice system where there is no jury system and the conviction rate is over
99%.
Under such extreme circumstances, the proportion of false confessions versus
true confessions is likely to be higher than in countries such as England, where
coercive questioning is rapidly declining due to improved police procedures and
training. With regard to the frequency of false confessions there are two crucial
questions that remain unanswered.
1. What proportion of all confessions obtained during custodial interrogation
is false?
2. How many false confessions lead to wrongful convictions?
Ofshe and Leo (1997a) state that there are three sources of information which
suggest that false confessions ‘occur regularly’ in America.
� Case studies. They cite a number of American books and articles written by
scholars and journalists on ‘false confessions’.
� Laboratory research. They cite the experimental work of Kassin and McNall
(1991) as evidence that commonly used interrogation techniques have a
coercive impact, which can result in false confession.
� Their own work on a large number of ‘probable or confirmed’ cases of false
confession. The basis of this work relates first to Ofshe’s detailed analysis
of interrogation transcripts, case files, sworn testimony concerning interrogations
and interviews with police officers and suspects, and second to
Leo’s observations of police interrogations.
Ofshe and Leo rightly point out that the known and publicized cases of false
confession may only represent ‘the tip of the iceberg’ of the real number of cases.
We do not know what proportion of confessions is false. What we do know is
that false confessions do happen on occasions and not all are brought to the
attention of the authorities.
Richardson (1991), as a part of his M.Sc. Dissertation, asked 60 juveniles
living in a residential home whether they had ever made a false confession
to the police. Fourteen (23%) claimed to have made a false confession to the