Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- 1 The Criminal Process and the Pursuit of Truth
- 2 Allegations
- 3 Confessions
- 4 Witness Testimony
- 5 Truth and the Probity of Evidence-Gathering
- 6 Decisions and Narratives: Factfinding and Case Construction
- 7 Truth and the Criminal Trial: Competing Stories
- 8 Truth, Sentencing and Punishment
- 9 Restoration, Reconciliation and Reconceptualizing Justice
- 10 The Truth, the Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth: The Truth of Who Is to Blame
- List of Cases
- References
- Index
3 - Confessions
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 December 2021
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface
- 1 The Criminal Process and the Pursuit of Truth
- 2 Allegations
- 3 Confessions
- 4 Witness Testimony
- 5 Truth and the Probity of Evidence-Gathering
- 6 Decisions and Narratives: Factfinding and Case Construction
- 7 Truth and the Criminal Trial: Competing Stories
- 8 Truth, Sentencing and Punishment
- 9 Restoration, Reconciliation and Reconceptualizing Justice
- 10 The Truth, the Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth: The Truth of Who Is to Blame
- List of Cases
- References
- Index
Summary
Frequently regarded as the most unequivocal evidence of guilt, a confession relieves doubts in the minds of judges and jurors more than any other evidence. In criminal law, the confession evidence is considered to be the most damaging form of evidence produced at trial and a prosecutor's most potent weapon. (Conti, 1999, p 14)
Some individuals express an overwhelming need to admit to their misconduct. Others have little choice but to do so when faced with overwhelming incriminating evidence. In both cases, the truth can be arrived at in an expedient manner and with minimal involvement from the criminal justice system – most suspects who confess to the police will not seek to retract their confession later but will admit guilt again prior to the trial by entering a plea of guilty. Assuming factual accuracy and a lack of coercion, a confession can be viewed as an optimum criminal justice outcome. Prosecutors are not faced with the task of determining whether the evidence suggests that conviction is a realistic prospect or in the public interest. Trial uncertainty is avoided. Limited state resources can be diverted to other cases, with the possibility that the additional resource secures the conviction of other offenders. The benefits of a confession go beyond the financial as victims, witnesses and defendants are spared the inconvenience and distress of attending court. All of these benefits are considerable.
Confessions are an incredibly powerful indicator of guilt in the eyes of jurors (Kassim, 1997; Watson et al, 2010; Garrett, 2011). Why someone may admit criminality is therefore important. Gudjonsso distinguishes between three general factors that explain why individuals make confessions:
[Suspects] confess due to a combination of factors, rather than to one factor alone. Three general factors appear to be relevant, in varying degree, to most suspects. These relate to an internal pressure (e.g. feelings of remorse, the need to talk about the offence), external pressure (e.g. fear of confinement, police persuasiveness), and perception of proof (e.g. the suspects’ perceptions of the strength of the evidence against them). The single strongest incentive to confess relates to the strength of the evidence against suspects. (Gudjonsson, 2003, p 157, emphasis in original)
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Criminal Justice and the Pursuit of Truth , pp. 41 - 64Publisher: Bristol University PressPrint publication year: 2021