Malloy, Lindsay. “Why Teens Confess to Crimes They Didn’t Commit.” Ted.com, TED Talks,
2009,
www.ted.com/talks/lindsay_malloy_why_teens_confess_to_crimes_they_didn_t_commit
?language=en. 1, November 2023


Summary:
According to Lindsay Malloy in her Ted Talk “Why teens confess to crimes they didn’t commit”,
In the United States teens are allowed to be interrogated the same way as an adult would be
without being accommodated for their IQ, mental state, advisory, etc. This is the sad reality of
the United States legal system as teens can be lied to the same way as adults are like being told
that they’ll be tried as an adult, that they already have “evidence” on them, that their friend in the
next room already outed them, threats of what will happen to them in prison and even more. All
this is to pick at their brains until a confession is obtained whether it be just or not. Teens aren’t
even entitled to have a parent figure in the room as they are being investigated as officers are
even allowed to deny them of this.

Reflection:
Do you agree or disagree with the text? Why or why not? Be specific!
â—Ź I agree with this text as in many interrogation articles and videos you could very clearly
see investigators are very unbiased in there methods of interrogation whether it be
children or teens, and adults.
Quote the text.
â—Ź “But let’s not forget that approximately one million or so of his peers are arrested every
year in the United states and may be subject to similar interrogation techniques.
Techniques that we know increase the risk for false confession”
What questions do you have about what the text is saying? What don’t you understand?
● I didn’t have any questions pertaining to the video.
What other information do you need to look up to better understand this article?
â—Ź I had to look up a little more information on Brendan Dassey and the case overall as I
didn’t know anything about it until now.
If you could say something to this author, what would you say?
â—Ź What would you do if you ever were in a situation where your child was being
interrogated alone in a room and the officers said you were not allowed to enter?
What does this document tell you about your research question?
â—Ź This ted talk shows me the morality in which my question is asking as for interrogation
tactics when used against juveniles is something terrible which nobody would see as
correct, especially for someone who is innocent.
How do you feel about the author’s writing style?
â—Ź The speaker spoke very clearly backing up her points with evidence statistics, video
evidence, and more.
What is the author’s intended audience and purpose (reason for writing)?
â—Ź To inform listeners of the horror that the United States criminal justice is on juveniles and
how they hold no punches on them treating all suspects the same despite age which is a
very important factor. The intended audience could be teenagers as it specifically speaks
to them, parents who have children which are teens or will be in the future, and
researchers.
Is the genre effective? Does the choice of genre make sense for what the author wants to
accomplish?
â—Ź The genre is informative in informing us the audience of teenagers and how they will
confess to crimes they haven’t done.
How do you know this is a credible author and document?
â—Ź Lindsay Malloy is a developmental psychology professor, and researcher. These
psychologists specifically focus on human growth and development making her qualified
to speak of the possible mental state these teens are in or put under in this interrogation
situations.
Quotation:
“The legal system seems to get that young victims and witnesses should be treated differently
than adults. But when it comes to young suspects, it’s like the kids glove comes off. And treating
juveniles as though they’re adults in interrogations is a problem, because literally hundreds of
psychological and neuroscientific studies tell us that juveniles do not think like adults, they do
not behave like adults, and they’re not built like adults”