A recent arti­cle in the New York Times dis­cussed the most com­mon rea­sons why sus­pects under inter­ro­ga­tion con­fess to crimes they did not com­mit. The arti­cle, adapt­ed from Rights at Risk: The Limits of Liberty in Modern America,” a forth­com­ing book writ­ten by David Shipler, observed an over­rep­re­sen­ta­tion of chil­dren, the men­tal­ly ill, those with intel­lec­tu­al dis­abil­i­ties, and those who are drunk or high among sus­pects who made con­fes­sions that were lat­er proven false. Shipler con­cludes, They are sus­cep­ti­ble to sug­ges­tion, eager to please author­i­ty fig­ures, dis­con­nect­ed from real­i­ty or unable to defer grat­i­fi­ca­tion. Children often think, as Felix did, that they will be jailed if they keep up their denials and will get to go home if they go along with inter­roga­tors. Mature adults of nor­mal intel­li­gence have also con­fessed false­ly after being manip­u­lat­ed.” Shipler also point­ed out that inter­roga­tors are trained in var­i­ous tech­niques to induce sus­pects to waive con­sti­tu­tion­al rights and to get sus­pects talk­ing. He writes, Officers are taught to use all the tricks and lies that courts per­mit with­in the scope of the Fifth Amendment’s shield against self-incrim­i­na­tion.” According to the Innocence Project, false con­fes­sions are among the most preva­lent caus­es of wrong­ful con­vic­tions. False con­fes­sions played sig­nif­i­cant roles in rough­ly 24% of approx­i­mate­ly 289 con­vic­tions lat­er reversed by DNA evi­dence, among which were cas­es that would have result­ed in execution.

(D. Shipler, Why Do Innocent People Confess?” The New York Times, February 23, 2012). See Innocence.

Citation Guide