Embedded Files
- Examining both methods of Accusatorial and Information Gathering, demonstrate that Accusatorial Methods increase the likelihood of false confessions, while information gathering methods protect the innocent yet preserve the interrogator's ability to elicit Confessions from a guilty person.
- False Confessions leading to wrongful convictions
- These two methods result in distinct questioning approaches, with information-gathering methods relying upon open-ended, exploratory approaches and accusatorial methods employing closed- ended, confirmatory approaches.
- The two methods can be contrasted based upon the model of deception detection that they invoke: information-gathering methods yield cognitive cues to deception, while accusatorial methods yield anxiety-based cues to deception.
Two Factors were linked to False Confessions.
- Personal (Psychological) Vulnerabilities of the individual
- The use of Accusatorial (Psychological-Based) Interrogative methods
- Methods that might be considered general, like direct questioning approaches, failed to show significant association with elicitation of a confession.
Interrogation Generally follows 3 components.
- Custody and Isolation
- Confrontation
- Minimization
Jesus Cisneros
Report abuse