Police-Induced Confessions: Risk Factors and Recommendations

Saul M. Kassin, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York
Steven A. Drizin, Center on Wrongful Convictions, Northwestern University School of Law
Thomas Grisso
Gisli H. Gudjonsson, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College
Richard A. Leo, University of San Francisco School of Law
Allison D. Redlich, State University of New York at Albany

Abstract

Recent DNA exonerations have shed light on the problem that people sometimes confess to crimes they did not commit. Drawing on police practices, laws concerning the admissibility of confession evidence, core principles of psychology, and forensic studies involving multiple methodologies, this White Paper summarizes what is known about police-induced confessions. In this review, we identify suspect characteristics (e.g., adolescence; intellectual disability; mental illness; and certain personality traits), interrogation tactics (e.g., excessive interrogation time; presentations of false evidence; and minimization), and the phenomenology of innocence (e.g., the tendency to waive Miranda rights) that influence confessions as well as their effects on judges and juries. This article concludes with a strong recommendation for the mandatory electronic recording of interrogations and considers other possibilities for the reform of interrogation practices and the protection of vulnerable suspect populations.