Interrogations-and-Confessions-Handbook

258 A Psychology of Interrogations and Confessions
Tudor, Evans and Brooke. The appeal was successful in spite of the fact that
McGovern’s involvement in the murders was not disputed:
Having considered these conflicting arguments and submissions, this Court is
clearly of the view that even if the confession given at the first interview was true,
as it was later admitted to be, it was made in the consequence of her being denied
access to a solicitor and is for that reason in the circumstances likely to be unreliable.
It follows that the prosecution has not in our judgment proved otherwise. We
think Mr Clegg is right, that if a solicitor had been present at the time this mentally
backward and emotionally upset young woman was being questioned, the
interview would have been halted on the very basis that her responses would be
unreliable. It seems that the interview was held quickly and without the formalities
prescribed by the Code of Conduct because the police were anxious to discover
the missing girl, but this heightened the risk of the confession being unreliable
(92 Cr.App.R., p. 233).
Their Lordships ruled the confession inadmissible under Section 76(2)(b) of
PACE and quashed the conviction. McGovern was released from prison.
This case is an example of circumstances likely to make a confession unreliable;
McGovern was denied her important right to a solicitor (external circumstances)
and she was mentally backward (internal circumstances). There might
therefore have been reason to doubt the truth of any statement she made, even
though, in fact, the statement turned out to be true. The court might not have
found either one of those factors sufficient without the other.
THE VOIRE DIRE
In order to decide on the question of admissibility the judge conducts ‘a trial
within a trial’, which is known as the voire dire. The purpose of the voire dire ‘is
to enable the judge to determine an issue of fact, namely whether the alleged
confession was, or may have been, obtained by oppression or in circumstances
making it likely to be unreliable’ (Rowe, 1986, p. 226).
The voire dire, post-PACE, takes place in the absence of the jury in accordance
with the exclusionary rules, which are designed for the protection of the
defendant. The jury are asked to withdraw whilst the questions of law are being
discussed by the legal advocates. After both sides have made their submissions
and the judge has made his ruling, the jury is invited back. If the confession
evidence is made admissible, then the jury is allowed to hear it. If the judge
rules it inadmissible, the jury will hear nothing of it, in which case the trial
may proceed on the basis of other evidence, or the prosecution decides to ‘offer
no evidence’.
In a case where the only evidence against the defendant is his or her confession,
the inadmissibility of that evidence means that the prosecution case
collapses.
How much time is spent on challenging the reliability or accuracy of police
interrogation evidence? According to Barnes and Webster (1980), about 5% of
the Crown Court’s trial time is taken up with this kind of dispute. Similar
findings have been reported by Vennard (1984). In both studies infrequent use