Interrogations-and-Confessions-Handbook

The American Law on Confessions 299
psychological tests (Agar, 1999; Frumkin, 2000; Goodman-Delahunty, 1997;
Grisso, 1998b; Reed, 1996; Rogers, Salekin & Sewell (1999).
Cases Applying Daubert to Expert False Confession Testimony
One of the most cogent and detailed applications of the Daubert principles to
expert testimony in the area of false confessions is found in United States v.
Hall. 55 This is an important case in relation to disputed confessions and the
admissibility of expert psychological testimony under Daubert. The nature of
the expert’s evidence and the way the trial and appellate courts ruled on his
testimony provide an important insight into expanding boundaries of psychological
evidence in cases of alleged coerced confessions in the USA.
Larry Hall was arrested in connection with the disappearance and death of
15-year-old Jessica Roach. There was no evidence connecting Hall to the crime,
but suspicion focused on him because of his history of ‘stalking or following
teenaged girls’. 56
The first police officers to interview Hall realized that he had mental health
problems and recommended him for treatment at a local facility. The police repeatedly
called him in for questioning over a period of several weeks and at one
point, when Hall continued to deny his involvement, the police officer became
upset with him, moved closer, and started suggesting the ‘right’ responses. Hall
began crying, asking what was expected of him and if he was allowed to leave.
However, the subsequent interview lasted from 10.00 a.m. until 3.25 a.m. the
following morning. When this was followed by a two-hour questioning by an
FBI agent, Hall began to make admissions about his involvement. No notes
were taken by the officers and there was no audio or tape recording of the interrogation
or the admissions. The FBI agent wrote out a statement in a narrative
format and asked Hall to sign it. Hall was charged with kidnapping Jessica
Roach for the purposes of sexual gratification and was tried in federal court. 57
At trial the defence argument was that ‘due to a personality disorder that
makes him susceptible to suggestion and pathologically eager to please, he
“confessed” to a crime that he did not really commit, in order to gain approval
from the law enforcement officers who were interrogating him; even the police
had characterized him as a “wannabe” ’. 58 The court permitted Arthur Traugott,
a psychiatrist who had examined Hall, to testify about his mental and emotional
problems. However, the court sharply limited Dr Traugott to testimony about
Hall’s mental condition (e.g. his attention-seeking behaviour and susceptibility
to suggestions) and to offering his opinion that, because Hall was easily
led, interrogators would experience difficulties obtaining reliable answers from
him. The court would not allow Dr Traugott to testify about the nature of the
interrogation techniques used by the police officers in the case, the number of
suggestions put to Hall during questioning or the potential capacity of Hall to
55 93 F.3d 1337 (7th Cir. 1996) (‘Hall I’); 974 F.Supp. 1198 (C.D. Ill. 1997) (‘Hall II’).
56 Hall I at 1339.
57 Hall I at 1340.
58 Hall I at 1341.