Judicial Notebook: Recent Cases Focus on False Confessions and Expert Testimony.

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Solomon Fulero ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Expert Testimony ◽  
False Confessions

Unreliable Confessions and Miscarriages of Justice in Britain

2002 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 332-343 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gisli H. Gudjonsson
Keyword(s):  
Mentally Ill ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Psychological Research ◽  
Personality Factors ◽  
False Confessions ◽  
High Profile ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Psychological Vulnerability ◽  
Court Of Appeal ◽  
British Research

Miscarriages of justice are sometimes caused by confessions, which are coerced by the police or result from suspects' psychological vulnerabilities during custody and interrogation. In recent years there has been considerable research into police interviewing, psychological vulnerability, and false confessions. This paper summarises the salient British research and reviews briefly 23 high-profile murder cases where convictions based on confession evidence have been quashed on appeal between 1989 and 2002. In over half the cases the appellant's psychological vulnerability, rather than coercive or oppressive interviewing, rendered the confession unreliable. The review of the cases demonstrates that relevant psychological research and expert testimony in cases of disputed confessions have had profound influence on the practice and ruling of the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords. The cases presented in this paper show that it is wrong to assume that only persons with learning disability or those who are mentally ill make unreliable or false confessions. Personality factors are often important in rendering a confession unreliable.

Do Video Recordings Help Jurors Recognize Coercive Influences in Interrogations?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iris Blandón-Gitlin ◽  
Amelia Mindthoff
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Video Recording ◽  
False Confessions ◽  
Jury Decision Making ◽  
Wrongful Convictions ◽  
Video Recordings ◽  
Confession Evidence ◽  
Jury Decision ◽  
Proper Interpretation

In recognition of the role that false confessions play in wrongful convictions, it is recommended that criminal interrogations be video recorded from beginning to end to document the process by which suspects decide to confess. With a full video recording, it is assumed that jurors can see for themselves whether the defendant was coerced to confess to a crime he or she did not commit. Yet research suggests that video recording may in fact induce bias in interpretations of coercion and confession reliability, as factors like camera angles and close-ups can make confession evidence too vivid and persuasive. Without proper interpretation, even seemingly neutral recordings may unduly influence jurors’ decisions about confessions. This chapter reviews the literature on the usefulness of video-recorded interrogations in assisting jury decision-making, as well as the potential for procedural safeguards (e.g., expert testimony) to improve jurors’ understanding of the issues at hand.

Imprisoned But Innocent: Wrongful Convictions and Imprisonments in Germany, 1990-2016

2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (5) ◽  
pp. 687-711 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fredericke Leuschner ◽  
Martin Rettenberger ◽  
Axel Dessecker
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Present Article ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
The United States ◽  
False Confessions ◽  
Prison Sentence ◽  
Wrongful Conviction ◽  
False Allegations ◽  
Wrongful Convictions ◽  
First Time

Although in the United States wrongful convictions and imprisonments are a major public and scientific concern, this topic has been largely ignored in Germany for decades. The present article offers for the first time an overview of all accessible German cases of successful retrials involving convicted persons who served a prison sentence since 1990. The data refer to 31 wrongfully convicted persons in 29 independent cases. Although the largest group consists of cases of false allegations, some of the wrongly convicted were considered not guilty by reason of insanity, and a few wrongful convictions occurred because of eyewitness misidentification and false confessions. In addition, incorrect expert testimony contributed considerably to the wrongful conviction in some cases.

A look at expert testimony on false confessions

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan P. Vallano ◽  
Ryan Winter
Keyword(s):  
Expert Testimony ◽  
False Confessions

Juror Beliefs About Police Interrogations, False Confessions, and Expert Testimony

2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 231-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Costanzo ◽  
Netta Shaked-Schroer ◽  
Katherine Vinson
Keyword(s):  
Expert Testimony ◽  
False Confessions ◽  
Police Interrogations

State-by-State Use of AMA Guides

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 3-7, 16
Keyword(s):  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Narrow Range ◽  
The United States ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Federal Employees ◽  
Permanent Disability ◽  
Sixth Edition ◽  
History Of ◽  
Canadian Provinces

Abstract This article presents a history of the origins and development of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), from the publication of an article titled “A Guide to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment of the Extremities and Back” (1958) until a compendium of thirteen guides was published in book form in 1971. The most recent, sixth edition, appeared in 2008. Over time, the AMA Guides has been widely used by US states for workers’ compensation and also by the Federal Employees Compensation Act, the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, as well as by Canadian provinces and other jurisdictions around the world. In the United States, almost twenty states have developed some form of their own impairment rating system, but some have a narrow range and scope and advise evaluators to consult the AMA Guides for a final determination of permanent disability. An evaluator's impairment evaluation report should clearly document the rater's review of prior medical and treatment records, clinical evaluation, analysis of the findings, and a discussion of how the final impairment rating was calculated. The resulting report is the rating physician's expert testimony to help adjudicate the claim. A table shows the edition of the AMA Guides used in each state and the enabling statute/code, with comments.

A Trial Consultant's View of the Medical Expert Witness

2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 7-10
Author(s):  
Deborah Rutt ◽  
Kathyrn Mueller
Keyword(s):  
Nonverbal Communication ◽  
Expert Testimony ◽  
Medical Literature ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Personal Injury ◽  
Expert Witnesses ◽  
Good Teacher ◽  
Medical Expert ◽  
Medical Terms ◽  
Medical Issues

Abstract Physicians who use the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) often serve as medical expert witnesses. In workers’ compensation cases, the expert may appear in front of a judge or hearing officer; in personal injury and other cases, the physician may testify by deposition or in court before a judge with or without a jury. This article discusses why medical expert witnesses are needed, what they do, and how they can help or hurt a case. Whether it is rendered by a judge or jury, the final opinions rely on laypersons’ understanding of medical issues. Medical expert testimony extracts from the intricacies of the medical literature those facts the trier of fact needs to understand; highlights the medical facts pertinent to decision making; and explains both these in terms that are understandable to a layperson, thereby enabling the judge or jury to render well-informed opinions. For expert witnesses, communication is everything, including nonverbal communication that critically determines if judges and, particularly, jurors believe a witness. To these ends, an expert medical witnesses should know the case; be objective; be a good teacher; state opinions clearly; testify with appropriate professional demeanor; communicate well, both verbally and nonverbally; in verbal communications, explain medical terms and procedures so listeners can understand the case; and avoid medical jargon, finding fault or blaming, becoming argumentative, or appearing arrogant.

Valuable Maxims for Expert Testimony

PsycCRITIQUES ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 61 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Andrew H. Benjamin
Keyword(s):  
Expert Testimony
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document