Interrogations-and-Confessions-Handbook

Psychological Vulnerability 473
due to his suffering from amnesia. At trial one of the hypotheses put forward
by the Crown psychiatrist was that Mr MacKenzie’s inability to recall much of
the offences could have been due to amnesia for the offences.
The appeal judges concluded that the trial judge was entitled to admit the
confessions into evidence before the jury:
Nevertheless, applying the guidance given by this Court in Galbraith [1981] 73
Cr.App.R. 124, [1981] 2 ALL E.R. 1060, we consider that where (1) the prosecution
case depends wholly upon confessions; (2) the defendant suffers from a significant
degree of mental handicap; and (3) the confessions were unconvincing to a point
where a jury properly directed could not properly convict upon them, then the
judge, assuming he had not excluded the confessions, should withdraw the case
from the jury. The confessions may be unconvincing, for example, because they
lack the incriminating details to be expected of a guilty and willing confessor, or
because they are inconsistent with other evidence, or because they are otherwise
inherently improbable. Cases depending solely or mainly on confessions, like cases
depending upon identification evidence, have given rise to miscarriages of justice.
We are therefore of the opinion that when the three conditions tabulated above
apply at any stage of the case, the judge should, in the interests of justice, take
the initiative and withdraw the case from the jury (p. 108)
Comments
The judgment in this case set forward three criteria for determining the admissibility
of confession evidence, which have been applied to other subsequent
cases. The absence of credible special knowledge was clearly of importance, as
well as MacKenzie’s known tendency to make false confessions, which was seen
to undermine his credibility in terms of self-incrimination in relation to the two
murders of which he was convicted. Interestingly, MacKenzie was of borderline
intelligence (IQ scores over time between 73 and 76) and his primary diagnosis
was personality disorder, although he had been admitted to hospital in the past
under a diagnosis of mental impairment. In the judgment it is not clear whether
the term ‘mental handicap’ refers to his borderline IQ, a previous diagnosis
relating to admission to hospital or encapsulates all of MacKenzie’s mental
(psychological) problems. There is no reference in the judgment to MacKenzie
meeting the criteria for ‘mental handicap’ as set out in Section 77 of PACE,
although this may have been argued at the appeal on MacKenzie’s behalf by
his counsel.
IDRIS ALI—PATHOLOGICAL LYING
This case involved the murder in 1981 or 1982 (a definite date of death was
never established) of a teenage girl. The murder came to light in December
1989 while workmen were excavating an area at the back of a house in Cardiff.
The case featured on a Crimewatch programme in February 1990, as a result
of which Idris Ali came forward and identified the girl. He was interviewed
extensively as a potential witness, but denied knowing anything about the
murder. The officers did not believe him and Ali eventually admitted having