Citation 2

Keatley, David A., et al. “Unmaking a Murderer: Behaviour Sequence Analysis of False Confessions.” Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, vol. 25, no. 3, 4 May 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2018.1463875. 26 Oct. 2023.

‌


Summary:

According to Unmaking a murderer: behavior sequence analysis of false confessions, when interrogating a possible suspect many officers’ confidence gets in the way of their duty thinking that the individual which they are interrogating is already guilty. Not a suspect but instead a criminal which they try and get a confession out of as opposed to evidence as usual. This overconfidence and lack of justice can result in investigators using the modern reid technique, a technique which works by making the suspect more and more comfortable with the officer causing them to tell the “truth” more and more until they confess. This is a double edged sword though as the technique works the same way against innocent people and actual criminals being non transparent to either.

Reflection:

Do you agree or disagree with the text? Why or why not? Be specific!

  • I agree with this text as in the recent year more and more stories come out of investigators saying they’ve presumably found the criminal for a horrendous crime with an overwhelming amount of evidence. This can then even be carried into court just for the judge and jury to realize well after the trial that this suspect had nothing to do with the crime.

Quote the text.

  • “police officers have an overconfidence in their own ability to detect deception and presume guilt; therefore, many police wrongly believe they only interrogate guilty suspects”

What questions do you have about what the text is saying? What don’t you understand?

  • Why exactly does the author believe that it’s not plausible that officers still use violence or threats of violence to enact a false confession? It’s very possible as nobody would want to get hurt by someone who’s a trained professional at doing just that.

What other information do you need to look up to better understand this article?

  • I needed to look up various definitions for words in this article that I didn’t understand either due to it being an advanced vocabulary of the author or just criminal justice terms which I didn’t know until finding the definition.

If you could say something to this author, what would you say?

  • Wouldn’t these psychological techniques do the opposite for an actual criminal instead making them lock up and not respond to a officer as opposed to giving a real confession?

What does this document tell you about your research question?

  • This document tells me of the victims of these techniques as to how they actually get tricked into a false confession. Why officer used these techniques even against innocent people (There confidence makes them think everyone they investigate is a criminal), and what the reid technique is which ties directly to my research question.

How do you feel about the author’s writing style?

  • The author’s writing style fits perfectly for which they are writing about keeping a serious tone without any humor/jokes to distract readers of this problem. The only problem is the length while not splitting their thoughts into well organized paragraphs instead just being colossal walls of text.

What is the author’s intended audience and purpose (reason for writing)?

  • The author’s purpose is to inform 

Is the genre effective? Does the choice of genre make sense for what the author wants to accomplish?

  • Yes the genre is effective for what the author is trying to convey in their argument. Using multiple cases as evidence to back up false confessions like the 16 ~ 17 who admitted to committing a first degree homicide, mutalation of a corpse, and sexual assault despite having done none of what was stated instead being trick into a false confession by the reid technique.

How do you know this is a credible author and document?

  • The text has been peer reviewed.

Quotation:

“The defendant, though denying involvement to begin with, eventually made a full oral and written confession to the crime. The defendant later recanted the confession; however, the confession was still provided at trial, which resulted in a guilty verdict on the counts of intentional homicide, rape, and mutilation of a corpse.”