Title: Competency
1Competency ConfessionsNinth Judicial Circuit
Office of the Public DefenderOrlando, FL
December 5, 2005
- Gregory DeClue, Ph.D., ABPP
- Sarasota, FL
- gregdeclue_at_mailmt.com
- 941-951-6674
2Agenda100-115 Introduction to Mentally Ill
Defendants Competency115-130 Minimal
Requirements U.S. Supreme Court130-145
Competence to Proceed145-200 Competence to
Waive the Right to Counsel200-215 Competence
to Forgo an Insanity Defense215-245 Confession
Issues245-300 General Discussion
3I. Competence
4The law seeks to implement a basic premise that
only the acts of an autonomous individual are to
be recognized by society. In doing so, the law
seeks to reaffirm the integrity of the individual
as well as the interests of society at large
(MPPS, p. 119)
5MPPS Melton, Petrila, Poythress, and Slobogin
(1997). Psychological Evaluations for the Courts.
New York Guilford.
6Key competency question Is there some kind of
incapacity to develop a defense with an attorney
that is the result of a mental illness?
7When the defendant appears to have mental health
problems, there are
- Legal issues
- Psychological issues
8Legal Issues
- Is he competent to proceed?
- Is he competent to decide to waive counsel and
proceed pro se? - Is he competent to decide to forgo an insanity
defense?
9Psychological issues
- Is he mentally ill?
- Is he mentally retarded?
10some definitions
11Incompetent to proceed
- F.S. 906.106(9) "Incompetent to proceed" means
unable to proceed at any material stage of a
criminal proceeding, which shall include trial of
the case, pretrial hearings involving questions
of fact on which the defendant might be expected
to testify, entry of a plea, proceedings for
violation of probation or violation of community
control, sentencing, and hearings on issues
regarding a defendant's failure to comply with
court orders or conditions or other matters in
which the mental competence of the defendant is
necessary for a just resolution of the issues
being considered.
12Note that competence is a legal issue. There is
no psychological or psychiatric diagnosis of
incompetent.
13Psychologists can assist courts in deciding
- Presence or absence of functional impairments
- Presence or absence of mental illness and/or
mental retardation - Response style (e.g., malingering)
- Type of mental illness
- Severity of symptoms
- Prognosis
14Mental illness
- F.S. 906.106(11) "Mental illness" means an
impairment of the emotional processes that
exercise conscious control of one's actions, or
of the ability to perceive or understand reality,
which impairment substantially interferes with a
defendant's ability to meet the ordinary demands
of living. For the purposes of this chapter, the
term does not apply to defendants who are solely
retarded or autistic, and does not include
intoxication or conditions manifested only by
antisocial behavior or substance abuse
impairment.
15(Mental) Retardation
- (12) "Retardation" means significantly
subaverage general intellectual functioning
existing concurrently with deficits in adaptive
behavior and manifested during the period from
conception to age 18. "Significantly subaverage
general intellectual functioning," for the
purpose of this definition, means performance
which is two or more standard deviations from the
mean score on a standardized intelligence test
specified in the rules of the department.
"Adaptive behavior," for the purpose of this
definition, means the effectiveness or degree
with which an individual meets the standards of
personal independence and social responsibility
expected of the individual's age, cultural group,
and community.
16Note that in legal proceedings the question of
whether or not someone is mentally ill or
mentally retarded is a legal question.
17DSM-IV-TR (the current diagnostic manual)
includes diagnoses for the following mental
disorders
- 305.1 Nicotine dependence
- 780.59 Breathing related sleep disorder
- 307.47 Nightmare disorder
- 300.7 Hypochondriasis
- 302.75 Premature ejaculation
- 625.8 Female hypoactive sexual desire disorder
due to unattractive spouse
18916.12 Mental competence to proceed.(1) A
defendant is incompetent to proceed within the
meaning of this chapter if the defendant does not
have sufficient present ability to consult with
her or his lawyer with a reasonable degree of
rational understanding or if the defendant has no
rational, as well as factual, understanding of
the proceedings against her or him.
19Dusky v. United States, 362 U.S. 402 (1960)
20Two prongs
- The defendants capacity to understand the
criminal process, including the role of the
participants in that process, and - The defendants ability to function in that
process, primarily through consulting with
counsel in the preparation of a defense.
21Competency to proceed focuses on the defendants
present ability to consult with counsel and to
understand the proceedings.
22The competency question is about the defendants
capacity as opposed to willingness or knowledge.
23A reasonable degree of rational understanding is
required.
24The competency standard emphasizes cognitive
functioning. The presence of mental illness is
relevant only insofar as that illness affects
ones rational and factual understanding as one
consults with counsel and undergoes trial.
25916.12(2) An expert shall first determine
whether the person is mentally ill and, if so,
consider the factors related to the issue of
whether the defendant meets the criteria for
competence to proceed that is, whether the
defendant has sufficient present ability to
consult with counsel with a reasonable degree of
rational understanding and whether the defendant
has a rational, as well as factual, understanding
of the pending proceedings.
26916.12(2) A defendant must be evaluated by no
fewer than two experts before the court commits
the defendant or takes other action authorized by
this chapter or the Florida Rules of Criminal
Procedure
27916.12(2) except if one expert finds that the
defendant is incompetent to proceed and the
parties stipulate to that finding, the court may
commit the defendant or take other action
authorized by this chapter or the rules without
further evaluation or hearing, or the court may
appoint no more than two additional experts to
evaluate the defendant.
28916.12(2) Notwithstanding any stipulation by
the state and the defendant, the court may
require a hearing with testimony from the expert
or experts before ordering the commitment of a
defendant.
29Recommendation to defense attorneys
- Do not stipulate to the findings of one
psychological expert who says that your client is
incompetent and should be committed.
30916.12(3) In considering the issue of competence
to proceed, an examining expert shall first
consider and specifically include in his or her
report the defendant's capacity to
(a) Appreciate the charges or allegations
against the defendant (b) Appreciate the range
and nature of possible penalties, if applicable,
that may be imposed in the proceedings against
the defendant (c) Understand the adversarial
nature of the legal process
31Those first three criteria concern the
defendants ability to understand the legal
process.
32The next three criteria concern the defendants
ability to function in the legal process.
33916.12(3) (d) Disclose to counsel facts
pertinent to the proceedings at issue
(e) Manifest appropriate courtroom behavior
and (f) Testify relevantly and include in
his or her report any other factor deemed
relevant by the expert.
34Some suggested relevant other factors
- Capacity to relate to ones attorney
- Capacity to weigh the advantages and
disadvantages of a guilty plea and make a
reasonable decision about whether to make such a
plea - Capacity to weigh the advantages and
disadvantages of an ngri (not guilty by reason of
insanity) plea and make a reasonable decision
about whether to make such a plea
35More than 90
- Percentage of criminal convictions resolved
through a guilty plea rather than trial
36Decisional competence
- An intelligent plea of guilty (or no contest)
requires not only understanding of the legal
process and the ability to communicate
information (the core of competency to stand
trial) but also the capacity to make a decision
in light of that understanding.
37Decisional competence
- An intelligent decision about whether to forgo a
possibly viable insanity defense requires not
only understanding of the legal process and the
ability to communicate information (the core of
competency to stand trial) but also the capacity
to make a decision in light of that understanding.
38Recommendations to defense attorneys
- Address competency and sanity separately
- Demand separate reports for competency and sanity
- Do not attempt to resolve the question of sanity
while the defendants competency is in question
39 - 916.12 (4) If an expert finds that the defendant
is incompetent to proceed, the expert shall
report on any recommended treatment for the
defendant to attain competence to proceed. In
considering the issues relating to treatment, the
examining expert shall specifically report on - (a) The mental illness causing the incompetence
40 - 916.12 (4) (b) The treatment or treatments
appropriate for the mental illness of the
defendant and an explanation of each of the
possible treatment alternatives in order of
choices - (c) The availability of acceptable treatment
and, if treatment is available in the community,
the expert shall so state in the report and - (d) The likelihood of the defendant's attaining
competence under the treatment recommended, an
assessment of the probable duration of the
treatment required to restore competence, and the
probability that the defendant will attain
competence to proceed in the foreseeable future.
41 - 916.12(5) A defendant who, because of
psychotropic medication, is able to understand
the nature of proceedings and assist in the
defendant's own defense shall not automatically
be deemed incompetent to proceed simply because
the defendant's satisfactory mental functioning
is dependent upon such medication. As used in
this subsection, "psychotropic medication" means
any drug or compound used to treat mental or
emotional disorders affecting the mind, behavior,
intellectual functions, perception, moods, or
emotions and includes antipsychotic,
antidepressant, antimanic, and antianxiety drugs.
42916.13 Involuntary commitment of defendant
adjudicated incompetent.-- (1) Every defendant
who is charged with a felony and who is
adjudicated incompetent to proceed, pursuant to
the applicable Florida Rules of Criminal
Procedure, may be involuntarily committed for
treatment upon a finding by the court of clear
and convincing evidence that (a) The defendant
is mentally ill and because of the mental
illness
43916.13(1)(a) 1. The defendant is manifestly
incapable of surviving alone or with the help of
willing and responsible family or friends,
including available alternative services, and,
without treatment, the defendant is likely to
suffer from neglect or refuse to care for herself
or himself and such neglect or refusal poses a
real and present threat of substantial harm to
the defendant's well-being and 2. There is a
substantial likelihood that in the near future
the defendant will inflict serious bodily harm on
herself or himself or another person, as
evidenced by recent behavior causing, attempting,
or threatening such harm
44916.13(1) (b) All available, less restrictive
treatment alternatives, including treatment in
community residential facilities or community
inpatient or outpatient settings, which would
offer an opportunity for improvement of the
defendant's condition have been judged to be
inappropriate and (c) There is a substantial
probability that the mental illness causing the
defendant's incompetence will respond to
treatment and the defendant will regain
competency to proceed in the reasonably
foreseeable future.
45916.13(2) A defendant who has been charged with
a felony and who has been adjudicated incompetent
to proceed, and who meets the criteria for
commitment to the department under the provisions
of this chapter, may be committed to the
department, and the department shall retain and
treat the defendant.
46916.13(2) No later than 6 months after the
date of admission or at the end of any period of
extended commitment, or at any time the
administrator or designee shall have determined
that the defendant has regained competency to
proceed or no longer meets the criteria for
continued commitment, the administrator or
designee shall file a report with the court
pursuant to the applicable Florida Rules of
Criminal Procedure.
47916.145 Adjudication of incompetency due to
mental illness dismissal of charges.--The
charges against any defendant adjudicated
incompetent to proceed due to the defendant's
mental illness shall be dismissed without
prejudice to the state if the defendant remains
incompetent to proceed 5 years after such
determination, unless the court in its order
specifies its reasons for believing that the
defendant will become competent to proceed within
the foreseeable future and specifies the time
within which the defendant is expected to become
competent to proceed. The charges against the
defendant are dismissed without prejudice to the
state to refile the charges should the defendant
be declared competent to proceed in the future.
48916.17 Conditional release.-- (1) The
committing court may order a conditional release
of any defendant who has been found to be
incompetent to proceed or not guilty by reason of
insanity, based on an approved plan for providing
appropriate outpatient care and treatment. The
committing court may order a conditional release
of any defendant in lieu of an involuntary
commitment to a facility pursuant to s. 916.13 or
s. 916.15.
49PART III FORENSIC SERVICES FOR PERSONS WHO ARE
RETARDED OR AUTISTIC
50916.301 Appointment of experts. (2) If a
defendant's suspected mental condition is
retardation or autism, the court shall appoint
two experts, one of whom must be the
developmental services program of the department,
each of whom will evaluate whether the defendant
meets the definition of retardation or autism
and, if so, whether the defendant is competent to
proceed.
51Key point
- There are different procedures for investigating
whether a person meets criteria for mental
illness or mental retardation/autism.
52Components of a competent assessment of competence
- 1) Notification
- 2) Social History
- 3) Legal Experience
- 4) Ability to relate relevant facts
- 5) Assessment of functional abilities for
competence
53Some research findings regarding competency to
proceed
5410 15
- Percent of clients about whom defense lawyers
have concerns about competency
55Disorganized speech
- Best predictor of attorneys decisions to request
competency examination
5630
- Percent of defendants who are referred for
competency evaluations who are found to be
incompetent - average across studies
5710
- Percent of defendants who are referred for
competency evaluations who are found to be
incompetent when more valid evaluation standards
are applied
58Common characteristics of incompetent defendants
- History of mental illness
- History of hospitalization for mental illness
- Little education
- Few useful job skills
- Low IQ
- Psychotic
- Depressed
59A two-stage model for competency assessment
- Stage 1 screening assessment using a structured
forensic assessment instrument - Stage 2 more comprehensive assessment of those
subjects who may have competency deficits
60Some competency assessment instruments
- Fitness Interview Test (FIT)
- MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool Criminal
Adjudication (MacCAT-CA) - Competence Assessment for Standing Trial for
Defendants with Mental Retardation (CAST-MR) - Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial -Revised
(ECST-R)
61DeClue, G. (2003). Toward a two-stage model for
assessing adjudicative competence. Journal of
Psychiatry Law, 31, 305-317.
- http//gregdeclue.myakkatech.com
62INTERROGATIONS AND DISPUTED CONFESSIONS A
MANUAL FOR FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGICAL
PRACTICEGregory DeClue, Ph.D., ABPP
- gregdeclue_at_mailmt.comhttp//gregdeclue.myakkatech
.com/ Professional Resource Presshttp//www.prp
ress.com/
63Part 1 False Confessions Nutshell Chapter 1
Introduction
64Nutshell Some people falsely confess to some
crimes some times. Some of those people begin by
denying guilt, then during police interrogation
say, I did it, then afterwards say, No, I
didnt.
65U. S. courts provide two opportunities to
challenge disputed confessions. At a suppression
hearing the defense can present evidence
challenging the voluntariness of the confession
and/or whether the defendant gave a knowing,
intelligent, and voluntary waiver of his
Constitutional rights prior to interrogation.
66At trial the defense can present evidence
challenging the accuracy of the confession.
67At both stages psychologists are called upon to
present expert testimony, either at the request
of the defense or the prosecution.
68Chapter 1 IntroductionDNA profiling can
identify the guilty and exonerate the innocent
69It was 9am, Monday September 15, 1984 when Sir
Alec Jeffreys removed some X-ray film from the
developing tank and experienced a rare moment in
science, an absolute eureka.
70Wed been looking for good genetic markers for
basic genetic analysis and had stumbled on a way
of establishing a humans genetic identification.
By the afternoon wed named our discovery DNA
fingerprinting.
71He used DNA profiling to establish the identity
of a man who raped and killed two 15-year-old
girls, three years apart, near the village of
Narborough, in England.
72The police collected blood from all the adult
males in and around Narborough and Jeffreys
successfully identified the culprit. Colin
Pitchfork became the first criminal ever
apprehended on the basis of DNA profiling
73When the local police contacted Jeffreys to
consult on the Narborough case, they had already
arrested a 17-year-old kitchen assistant who had
a record of minor sex offenses.
74During their interrogation of him he confessed to
one of the murders, but not the other.
75Jeffreys analysis showed that the same man had
committed both rapes, but it was not the man who
had confessed.
76The police subsequently dropped the case against
that man, says Sir Alec, and he became the
first person ever proven innocent by DNA
analysis. If we hadnt developed the technology,
Im confident he would have been gaoled jailed
for life.
77In 1996, the FBI reported that in sexual assault
cases in which DNA results could be obtained, the
DNA evidence exonerated the primary suspect in
25 of the cases.
78These days, the use of DNA profiling sees 30 per
cent of accused in British rape cases exonerated.
79Some innocent people confess to crimes
80Although DNA testing can allow some falsely
accused and some falsely convicted people to
prove their innocence, in some cases there is no
biological evidence to test.
81It is therefore critical to study cases where
innocent people have been convicted and to
identify what errors led to the wrongful
convictions, so that the risk of such errors can
be minimized in the future.
82Bedau and colleagues have analyzed 416 cases of
wrongful conviction of capital or potentially
capital crimes in the United States in the 20th
century. Of the 350 cases reported in the 1987
paper, 40 were sentenced to death.
83These miscarriages of justice were caused by a
number of different errors, often in combination,
with the most common errors being perjury by
prosecution witnesses and mistaken eyewitness
testimony.
84Of the 350 cases reported in the 1987paper, 49
(14) involved false confessions. Although a few
of those were voluntary false confessions, most
were the result of rigorous interrogation by the
police.
85When DNA evidence reveals wrongful convictions,
in how many cases has an innocent person
confessed? Scheck, Neufeld, and Dwyer (2000)
found the answer to be nearly one in four (15 of
62 cases).
86In U.S. law there are mechanisms designed to
reduce the risk of false confessions occurring,
and to increase the chance that a false
confession will be identified as such.
Psychologists can assist the courts in both of
those tasks.
87Part 2 ImplicationsChapter 2 The Causes of
Police-Induced False Confessions?Why do
Suspects Confess?
88Self-incriminating admissions or confessions lead
to serious negative consequences, commonly
including adverse effects to self-esteem and
integrity, loss of freedom and liberty, and
possible financial penalties.
89Police interrogation can be construed as a
process of at least temporarily overcoming
whatever factors inhibit a suspect from
confessing.
90The following factors are expected to occur
frequently fear of legal sanctions, concern
about ones reputation, not wanting to admit to
oneself what one has done, not wanting ones
family and friends to know about the crime, and
fear of retaliation.
91Nevertheless, the percentage of suspects who
confess during police interrogation is
substantial, ranging from under 40 to over 70
in various studies.
92Gudjonsson The suspects behavior during the
interrogation is likely to be more influenced by
their perceptions, interpretations, and
assumptions about what is happening than by the
actual behavior of the police.
93 When the suspect perceives the evidence against
him as being strong he is more likely to confess,
believing that there is no point in denying the
offense.
94Consider a decision faced by criminal defendants
at a later stage in the judicial process whether
to plead out or go to trial.
95In making that decision, the defendant typically
has guidance from his attorney, as well as
friends and family, and has the luxury of time to
weigh his options.
96There is considerable opportunity to gain
accurate information about the strength of the
case against him, often including detailed
depositions of prospective witnesses and
authentication of any physical evidence.
97The prosecutor has an ethical responsibility to
provide exculpatory as well as inculpatory
evidence to the defense.
98If the defendant chooses to enter a plea of
guilty or no contest, the judge will engage him
in a colloquy to insure that he understands the
rights he is forgoing and that he is competent to
waive the rights and enter a plea.
99If there is doubt about his competence to
proceed, that must be explored, which typically
involves, at minimum, one psychological or
psychiatric evaluation relevant to his
understanding about the charges and his
decision-making ability.
100It is estimated that over 90 of criminal cases
are resolved via plea bargaining rather than
trial. In at least some jurisdictions, a
defendant has the right to enter a best
interests plea.
101The safeguards afforded a criminal defendant are
designed to insure that he is both capable of,
and actually performing, a rational act as he
pleads guilty (or no contest).
102In contrast, interrogation procedures are
designed to encourage rational people to make
decisions that no rational person would make
outside of the context of the influence of modern
police interrogation.
103During the shift from denial to admission, police
use one set of tactics to alter the suspects
perception of his immediate situation, and
another set of tactics to communicate information
to the subject about incentives to confess and
disincentives for continued denial.
104The process of interrogation produces confession
because it results in the suspect being convinced
either that he has been caught (if he is guilty)
or that his situation is hopeless (if he is
innocent), that further denial is pointless, and
that it is in his self-interest to confess.
105 For both innocent and guilty suspects,
confessing is something neither would have chosen
to do prior to the start of the interrogation and
something each would have predicted he would have
resisted to his last breath (Ofshe Leo, 1997,
p. 194).
106Post-admission Narrative
107Social scientists who have analyzed
interrogations report that there are no reliable,
observable differences between interrogations
yielding true or false confessions until after
the I did it statement.
108Therefore, police interrogation should never end
at the point when the police believe the suspect
has made admissions allowing him to be charged
with the most serious offense possible.
109In the next step, the post-admission narrative,
interrogators elicit detailed descriptions of
events. If the suspect provides accurate details
showing special knowledge of the details of the
crime, then the confession can be judged as
reliable.
110If the suspects post-admission narrative does
not match the facts of the case, the reliability
of the confession is in doubt.
111There are at least three ways to determine the
reliability of the confession1. Does the
confession statement lead to the discovery of
evidence that is unknown to the police (e.g., a
location of a missing murder weapon, or stolen
property)?
1122. Does it include highly unusual features of the
crime that have not been made public (e.g.,
special mutilation of the body, unusual method of
killing or sexual act)?
1133. Does the suspect provide accurate descriptions
of the mundane crime scene detail, which have not
been made public (e.g., the type of clothing the
victim was wearing, presence of certain pieces of
furniture at the crime scene)?
114Every police interrogator in every case should
obtain a detailed post-admission narrative.
115Immediate analysis of the post-admission
narrative and follow-up investigation of details
can guide the police in deciding whether to focus
their investigation on this suspect or to keep
looking for the truly guilty party.
116If the suspect is charged, preservation of the
post-admission narrative facilitates fair
prosecution and defense of the case. Therefore
the post-admission narrative should always be
video- or audio-recorded.
117To avoid actually, to recognize contamination,
the entire interrogation should be electronically
recorded.
118Chapter 3 The Consequences of Police-Induced
False Confessions
119Three types of false confessions 1) voluntary
2) coerced-compliant 3) coerced-internalizedKa
ssin and Wrightsman (1985)
120voluntary false confessions those purposely
offered in the absence of elicitation?
Lindbergh baby? Colorado v. Connelly (1986)
121When making a coerced-compliant false confession,
the suspect publicly professes guilt in response
to extreme methods of interrogation, despite
knowing privately that he or she is truly
innocent.
122A coerced-internalized false confession is made
when the suspect through the fatigue,
pressures, and suggestiveness of the
interrogation process actually comes to believe
that he or she committed the offense.
123DeClue (2005)? self-initiated? first
response? police induced
124Self-initiated confessions occur when a person
initiates contact with a law enforcement officer
or other person in authority and declares that he
or she is guilty of a crime.
125First-response confessions occur when the police
approach a person and initiate questioning, and
the persons first response is I did it.
126Police-induced confessions occur when the police
approach a person and initiate questioning, the
persons first response is something other than
I did it, (for example, I didnt do it), the
police engage in further conversation with the
person, and the person subsequently says, I did
it.
127This classification scheme avoids legally-charged
words, and it is not necessary to delve into the
minds of the confessor or the police in order to
classify a confession.
128The Consequences of Police-Induced False
Confessions
129In the 1986 decision in Colorado v. Connelly, the
Court wrote
130Triers of fact accord confessions such heavy
weight in their determinations that the
introduction of a confession makes the other
aspects of a trial in court superfluous, and the
real trial, for all practical purposes, occurs
when the confession is obtained.
131Chapter 4 Policy Recommendations for
Police-Induced False Confessions
1321) Courts should adopt mandatory tape recording
requirements in felony cases.
133I am convinced that police officers should be
required to electronically record entire
interrogations because
1341. The same techniques that police use to elicit
confessions from guilty suspects can cause some
innocent people to confess some times. 2. It is
very likely that police neither intend to nor
recognize that they are creating false
confessions when they do.
1353. There is no scientific, objective, reliable
way of distinguishing between true and false
confessions, up to and including the point of I
did it.
1364. Careful analysis can often distinguish between
true and false confessions via a properly
conducted post-admission narrative. For example,
a guilty subject can give accurate details that
would only be known by people who had intimate
knowledge of the crime scene (e.g., by
perpetrating the crime).
1375. In the process of interrogation, police
officers typically confront the suspect with a
combination of true and fabricated evidence,
building the impression that the suspect is
caught and there is nothing to be lost by
confessing.
1386. Just by human nature, people, including the
police, do not accurately recall the form and
content of their own questions, focusing instead
on the other persons answers.
1397. Police interrogators contaminate the
confession to varying degrees as they provide
details of the crime to the suspect.
1408. Only by recording the entire interrogation is
it possible to show whether the suspect is
providing details that come from guilty knowledge
or is merely spitting back what was fed to him
along the way.
141Requiring that interrogations be recorded is not
to imply that police are liars or cheats.
142The best reason for requiring that interrogations
be recorded, in my opinion, is so that one can
see whether the post-admission narrative includes
details that were never supplied by the police to
the suspect.
1432) The admissibility of confession evidence
should be allowed only when the accused subjects
guilt is corroborated by independent evidence.
1443) All confessions should meet a reasonable
standard of reliability before being admitted.
145Part 3 FoundationPracticing forensic
psychologists can assist the courts by applying a
model that attempts to reflect, not reform the
law relevant to interrogations and confessions
(Grisso, 2003).
146Chapter 5 A Model for Forensic Psychological
Assessment/Consultation
147Grisso, T. (2003). Evaluating competencies
Forensic assessments and instruments, 2nd
Edition, New York Plenum.
148Chapter 6 Legal Context
149For psychologists interested in working on
disputed confession cases, it is helpful to have
some knowledge of the legal context. I recommend
reading all available U.S. Supreme Court cases
that have dealt with custodial confession issues.
150Rumsfeldian Auto-colloquy Have I summarized all
the U.S. Supreme Court cases I found via Internet
search engines? You bet I have.
151Have I inadvertently missed some cases? That
wouldnt surprise me a bit.
152Have I provided the reader with an accurate
understanding of the current legal standards in
her jurisdiction? Absolutely not.
153Do I recommend that the reader treat this chapter
as a legal text? Heavens, no.
154Do I expect that the reader will have gained a
greater appreciation of the issues courts
consider in confession cases? I surely do.
155Do this and previous chapters lay the groundwork
for lists of personal characteristics and
interrogation tactics that are considered to
increase the risk of a false confession and are
listed as such in chapter 10? Why, yes they do,
and I thank me for asking that.
156Chapter 7 Legal Issues for which Psychological
Testimony May Be Relevant
157A psychologists testimony is likely to be
relevant to some, but not all, legal issues
regarding a defendants confession. Different
legal cases will generate different psycholegal
questions.
158Legal Issues For Which Psychological Testimony Is
Expected To Be Relevant
1591. Did the State fail to prove, by a
preponderance of the evidence, that the Defendant
knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived
his Miranda rights?
1602. Did the State fail to prove, by a
preponderance of the evidence, that the
Defendants supposed confession was freely and
voluntarily made under the totality of the
circumstances?
1613. Should the Court suppress the Defendants
coerced statements to the police because they are
so highly unreliable and virtually uncorroborated?
162Note that these questions are in the form that
would be presented to the judge. The questions
posed to a testifying psychologist would be in a
different form, but would be designed to produce
testimony that would be relevant to the question
ultimately considered by the judge.
163Part 4 Conducting Psychological Assessments and
Preparing Testimony
164Chapter 8 Addressing Waiver of Miranda Rights
165Legal Issue In Dickerson v. U.S., 530 U.S. 428
(2000), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld its
decision in Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436
(1966).
166 Miranda requires procedures that will warn a
suspect in custody of his right to remain silent
and which will assure the suspect that the
exercise of that right will be honored.
167 What does Miranda require? The Miranda Court
wrote To summarize, we hold that when an
individual is taken into custody or otherwise
deprived of his freedom by the authorities in any
significant way and is subjected to questioning,
the privilege against self-incrimination is
jeopardized.
168 Procedural safeguards must be employed
to protect the privilege, and unless other fully
effective means are adopted to notify the person
of his right of silence and to assure that the
exercise of the right will be scrupulously
honored, the following measures are required.
169 He must be warned prior to any questioning that
he has the right to remain silent, that anything
he says can be used against him in a court of
law, that he has the right to the presence of an
attorney, and that if he cannot afford an
attorney one will be appointed for him prior to
any questioning if he so desires.
170 Opportunity to exercise these rights must be
afforded to him throughout the interrogation.
171 After such warnings have been given, and such
opportunity afforded him, the individual may
knowingly and intelligently waive these rights
and agree to answer questions or make a
statement.
172 But unless and until such warnings and waiver
are demonstrated by the prosecution at trial, no
evidence obtained as a result of interrogation
can be used against him.
173The requirement of a knowing and intelligent
waiver comes from the following
174If the interrogation continues without the
presence of an attorney and a statement is taken,
a heavy burden rests on the government to
demonstrate that the defendant knowingly and
intelligently waived his privilege against
self-incrimination and his right to retained or
appointed counsel.
175The requirement of a voluntary waiver comes from
this passage from Miranda
176Whatever the testimony of the authorities as to
waiver of rights by an accused, the fact of
lengthy interrogation or incommunicado
incarceration before a statement is made is
strong evidence that the accused did not validly
waive his rights.
177In these circumstances the fact that the
individual eventually made a statement is
consistent with the conclusion that the
compelling influence of the interrogation finally
forced him to do so. It is inconsistent with any
notion of a voluntary relinquishment of the
privilege.
178 Moreover, any evidence that the accused was
threatened, tricked, or cajoled into a waiver
will, of course, show that the defendant did not
voluntarily waive his privilege.
179The requirement of warnings and waiver of rights
is a fundamental with respect to the Fifth
Amendment privilege and not simply a preliminary
ritual to existing methods of interrogation.
180At a suppression hearing, a judge decides (among
other things) whether a particular person in a
particular situation at a particular time made a
knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of his
Miranda rights.
181A psychologists testimony is likely to be
considered relevant if it helps the judge make
that determination.
182Some psychologists, by virtue of their knowledge,
training, and experience, are able to assist the
court in each of the following areas
1831. Assess the defendants current mental status,
including intelligence, memory, reading
comprehension, listening comprehension, and
psychopathology.
1842. Reconstruct the defendants mental state at
the time of the waiver (similar to the type of
assessment in insanity and other
mental-state-at-the-time-of-the-offense
evaluations see, e.g., Rogers Shuman, 2000).
1853. Gather and analyze information regarding the
physical and psychological environment in which
the waiver was obtained (Crane v. Kentucky,
1986, supra, p. 684).
1864. Assist the judge in understanding interactions
among the above.
187Assessment Procedures
188First, the psychologist reviews all available
information regarding the events that occurred
immediately before, during, and after the waiver.
189The second step is to conduct a current
psychological evaluation of the defendant.
190Although the crucial question involves the
defendants mental state at the time of the
waiver, standard psychological assessment
procedures are designed to assess a persons
current mental state, intellectual ability,
reading ability, etc.
191As with other forensic psychological assessments,
a history and mental status provide useful
information, which can be supplemented by a
psychiatric screening instrument such as the
Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) or the Symptom
Checklist 90-R (SCL-90-R)
192 by a structured diagnostic interview (See
Rogers, 2001), and/or by an objective test of
psychopathology such as the Personality
Assessment Inventory or the MMPI-2.
193IQNeuropsychological Screening
194If psychopathology is suggested by interview
and/or test data, testing for feigning or
exaggeration of symptoms, for example with the
Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS)
should be conducted.
195If cognitive deficits are suggested, then testing
for exaggeration or feigning should be conducted
with an instrument such as the Word Memory Test
(WMT) or the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM).
196Reading and listening ability, particularly
reading comprehension and listening
comprehensionWoodcock-Johnson III Tests of
Achievement (WJ-III) or Wechsler Individual
Achievement Test-Second Edition (WIAT-2)
197WJ-III Letter-Word IdentificationReading
FluencyStory RecallUnderstanding
DirectionsPassage ComprehensionStory
Recall-DelayedOral ComprehensionReading
Vocabulary
198Administration of those subtests allows scoring
of the following clusters Oral
LanguageListening ComprehensionBroad
ReadingReading Comprehension
199If the defendant wrote out a statement/confession
Writing FluencyWriting Samples ? Written
Expression composite
200These subtests allow comparison to group norms
and they provide a mechanism for computing an age
level and a grade level for the various skills
measured.
201Although it is currently not recommended that a
psychologist attempt to describe a persons
intelligence as comparable to that of, say, a
nine year old, it is useful and understandable to
report that a persons reading or oral
comprehension skills are at, say, a third-grade
level.
202Instruments for Assessing Understanding and
Appreciation of Miranda Rights (Grisso)
203At the conclusion of the face-to-face evaluation
(which might involve more than one session), the
psychologist should have a clear assessment of
the persons current mental state a detailed
account of the persons recollection of events
occurring before, during, and after the waiver
204 the defendants description of how and why his
mental state may have been different at the time
of the waiver objective measurements of the
defendants current understanding of his rights
205 the defendants description regarding what he
understood at the time of the waiver and the
defendants description of why he waived his
rights.
206Chapter 9 Addressing the Voluntariness of a
Confession
207The legal issue to be considered by the judge at
the suppression hearing might be presented as
follows Did the State fail to prove, by a
preponderance of the evidence, that the
Defendants supposed confession was freely and
voluntarily made under the totality of the
circumstances?
208There must be some element of police coercion for
a confession to be ruled involuntary (Colorado v.
Connelly, 1986).
209The ultimate issue has been defined in
psychological terms
210Is the confession the product of an essentially
free and unconstrained choice by its maker? If it
is, if he has willed to confess, it may be used
against him.
211 If it is not, if his will has been overborne
and his capacity for self-determination
critically impaired, the use of his confession
offends due process (Culombe v. Connecticut,
1961)
212Courts do not look to experts to decide whether a
particular defendants will was overborne, due to
the inherent subjectivity of such a question.
213Rather, psychologists can provide useful
information about the person, the situation, and
the person-situation interaction.
214The psychologist can assist the Court by
performing an assessment that includes the
following
2151. Gather and analyze information regarding the
physical and psychological environment in which
the confession was obtained (Crane v. Kentucky,
1986)
2162. Gather and analyze information about the
interrogation techniques employed by the police.
2173. Assess the defendants current mental status,
including intelligence, memory, reading
comprehension, listening comprehension,
personality, and psychopathology.
2184. Reconstruct the defendants mental state
during the confession.
2195. Assist the judge in understanding the effect
of the interrogation techniques on the defendant
throughout the interrogation.
220The most empirically validated instruments for
measuring interrogative suggestibility are the
Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales (GSS 1 and GSS 2)
221The Gudjonsson Compliance Scale (GCS) has been
developed to measure the personality trait of
compliance.
222There is a forensic assessment instrument that
can help psychologists gather information about
why a person confessed the Gudjonsson Confession
Questionnaire Revised (GCQ-R).
223Chapter 10 Addressing the Reliability of a
Confession
224Should the Court suppress defendants coerced
statements to the police because they are so
highly unreliable and virtually uncorroborated?
225A psychologist serving as an expert witness can
present testimony as follows
2261. Some people falsely confess to crimes some
times.
2272. Some interrogation procedures increase the
risk of false confessions.
2283. Some personal factors make some people more
vulnerable to police influence than others.
2294. There are procedures recommended by social
scientists and law enforcement agencies to avoid
false confessions.
2305. There are procedures recommended by social
scientists and law enforcement agencies to
recognize false confessions when they occur.
231For items 2 through 5, the psychologist can then
describe factors in the instant case that are
present, and those that are not present.
232I am not in any way suggesting that psychologists
or other social scientists should replace juries
or do juries jobs. I do suggest that
psychologists who study the psychology of
interrogations and confessions have special
knowledge that can help juries do their jobs.
233Synopsis
234A psychologist who has studied the psychology of
interrogations and confessions can assist the
court when a particular interrogation or
confession is held up to careful scrutiny.
235The psychological assessment and analysis will
not directly address whether a confession is true
or false, but it will assist the consideration of
the reliability of a confession.
236In the short run, psychologists testimony may
sometimes enhance the cause of justice and may at
times help someone get away with murder.
237In the long run, psychologists testimony is
likely to lead law enforcement officers to gather
confession evidence in a consistently more
reliable way, which will enhance liberty and
justice for all.
238INTERROGATIONS AND DISPUTED CONFESSIONS A
MANUAL FOR FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGICAL
PRACTICEGregory DeClue, Ph.D., ABPP
- gregdeclue_at_mailmt.comhttp//gregdeclue.myakkatech
.com/ Professional Resource Presshttp//www.prp
ress.com/