Interrogations-and-Confessions-Handbook

The Psychological Assessment 315
improving their chances of acquittal. Sometimes the information they give is
contradicted by the other evidence in the case. For example, in one murder
case the accused told me that the police officers had gone to his cell on several
occasions to question him in between formal interviews. This was one of the
reasons he gave for having falsely confessed. There was no evidence from the
Custody Record to support this claim that the police officers had gone to his
cell to question him. During his evidence in court the accused conceded that
he had lied to me about it. Not surprisingly, in view of the detrimental effects
on the defence when defendants are shown during their testimony to have lied
(Bedau & Radelet, 1987; Shaffer, 1985), the accused in the present case was
convicted of the murder.
Interrogative Factors
Interrogative factors cover a range of verbal and non-verbal communication
associated with the interrogation itself. Video recording of the interrogation
provides the most informative account of what was said and done, and the
manner in which the interrogation was conducted. Tape recordings give less
overall information, but they are a formidable improvement on written notes.
Not only is the recording more accurate than note taking; often certain attitudes
and signs of distress are evident. Interrogators’ bias and style of questioning
may be observed as well as the techniques utilized. When leading questions
have been asked by the interrogators and persuasive manipulation and pressure
employed, then these have to be related to the accused’s personality and
mental state, as well as to the circumstances of the situation. Occasionally
police officers are found to play on suspects’ weaknesses, which in vulnerable
suspects can result in a false confession. The manipulation of feelings of guilt,
particularly in suspects who are accused of murdering loved ones, can markedly
increase the likelihood of an unreliable statement.
An Explanation for the Alleged False Confession
When defendants claim that they have made a false confession to the police then
it is important to obtain from them a detailed account of the factual and subjective
experiences pertaining to the interrogation and confession. This includes
providing, if they can, coherent reasons for having made a false confession. These
explanations can then be used to test relevant hypotheses. For example, if a defendant
claims that he was merely giving in to leading questions or that he
did not understand the nature of the questions during the interrogation, then
this could possibly be confirmed or refuted by psychological assessment and by
carefully studying the record of the police interview. In some cases defendants
provide explanations for the confession that can be borne out by the psychological
evaluation, or at least on the face of it they appear to be credible. Do
the explanations given by the defendant make sense on the basis of the psychological
evaluation? For example, in one case of a proven false confession to
double murder (see Chapter 9), a man suffering from learning disability told
me that the primary reason for his having confessed falsely to the police was