In the video “The Confessions” presented by Frontline, a murder of a women that was committed by

Imagine spending a quarter of one’s life in prison for a crime one didn’t commit. This is what happened to Michael Morton back on February 17, 1987, when he was sentenced to life in prison for the murder of his wife even though there wasn’t real evidence linking him to the murder. There was no scientific evidence, no eyewitness, no murder weapon, or a believable motive. He was their only suspect, and the only thing they had on him that made him look guilty was the statement of the medical examiner Dr. Roberto Bayardo who placed Christine Morton’s time of death at 1:15 AM that morning before Michael left for work. The medical testimony had convinced the jurors that the wife had died while Michael was still in the house. Christine died of eight

Steven Avery, a family man, a victim of injustice and an accused murderer. One may have reasoned that his murder conviction was a crime of passion, due to the injustice Steven suffered from his 1985 false conviction of rape and assault, but that may have been before his story caught national attention. A documentary, “Making a Murderer”, directed by Laura Ricciardi and Moira Demos, arose from his story’s infamy. With this documentary came numerous questions as to Avery’s possible innocence, but above all else answers that shed light on a possibly corrupt justice system that appears intent on framing Steven Avery for Teresa Halbach’s murder. “Making a Murderer” effectively portrays a message of the injustice of Steven Avery’s murder conviction and possible corruption within the Manitowoc’s justice system through the use of footage and accounts from people who were involved with his conviction.

Watching the Frontline Confessions documentary made me think about a lot of things. First of all I feel that what Detective Robert Glen Ford did was wrong. He abused his power of the badge to harshly interrogate innocent men. He spent continuous hours interrogating Daniel Williams in a small room, pressuring him into confessing to something that he didn’t commit. Ford threatened Daniel with the death penalty multiple times. When Daniel told him his side of the story, he called him a liar and said, “If you don’t start telling me the truth, you’re going to die.” I think one of the ironic things is that the detective was the only one lying in the interrogation. When Daniel Williams took the polygraph test he passed, but

“The only two people that know I am innocent, is myself and the killer.” Imagine being blamed for a crime you did not commit, and nobody would believe you no matter what you said. Steven Truscott had forty-two years of his life taken from him for being charged with a crime he did not commit. He was charged at only the age of fourteen for murdering and raping twelve year old Lynne Harper. He then became the youngest death-row inmate after one of the most famous trials in the history of Canada. Steven Truscott should never have been convicted for the murder and rape of Lynne Harper due to the fact the forensic evidence was questionable the

Spohn, Beichner, and Davis-Frenzel do not conduct a field study as Frohmann does, instead they examined all sexual assault cases cleared by arrest in Miami Florida in 1997. They did however replicate Frohmann’s design of interviewing a sample of the prosecutors who handled the cases. By using this different method of research, Spohn, Beichner, and Davis-Frenzel’s are able to show the frequency in which prosecutors used discrepant accounts and ulterior motives to reject cases. This extends upon Frohmann’s research. Their findings that, “charging decisions primarily reflect the prosecutor’s assessment of the likelihood of conviction” (Spohn, et al. 2001, p. 206) is consistent with Frohmann 's Findings. They also agreed with Frohmann’s categories of typifications, however they found that a substantial amount of cases were rejected for reasons other than discrediting the victim such as, the victim’s failure to appear for a pretrial interview, refusal to cooperate in the prosecution of the case, or admission that the charges were fabricated (Spohn, et al. 2001).

The criminal justice system is meant to protect the innocent, and punish those who are guilty of a crime. However, no system is perfect, and as a result, sometimes the innocent become victims of the system that was meant to protect them. How exactly do these innocent people become victims of the system? Sometimes the person gets framed, and the crime scene is staged to point a finger at them. Sometimes, there is no strong physical evidence against them, yet circumstantial evidence is used by the crown to put them away. This happened to a 17 year old boy named Adnan Syed in Baltimore, Maryland, who was imprisoned for life, for the alleged murder of his ex-girlfriend Hae Lee. Throughout the Serial podcast, Sarah Koenig is able to critically analyze information which proves Adnan’s innocence. Firstly, Asia’s letters gave Adnan an alibi for the time of the murder. Secondly, Adnan’s innocence can be demonstrated through the lack of any strong evidence and the prosecution’s use of circumstantial evidence which can be disproved. Thirdly, Jay’s constantly changing testimony is not credible evidence of Adnan’s guilt, making him innocent.

They lied to the 5 teens saying, the other in the group is telling them they did the crime and if they admit it they can walk out a free man. Manipulating and pressuring the teens to do something or say something they want to hear is a terrible persona. That is a tough situation for a teen to be in; they are not used to being locked up for days and being interrogated by the police. In their head, they thought the only way to get out was by saying something the prosecutor and detective wanted to hear, which untimely ended up hurting them the most in the trial.

Using the example of the case of Damon Thibodaux, he was taken for questioning after a girl who they were last seen with went missing. She was found strangled and naked (Leo, 2008). A homicide officer took over the case, and Thibodaux was interrogated for several hours. Although Thibodaux repeatedly said he knew nothing about the murder, the interrogation kept going, eventually the officer was able to record a statement from Thibodaux pleading guilty of consensual and non-consensual sex with the victim, beating, and assassinating her. Thibodaux was condemned to death, and was to spend fifteen years on death row and sixteen years in jail before DNA examination confirmed that he was not guilty (Kassin, 2013). Thibodauxs exoneration proceeding concluded that fatigue and exhaustion from the overnight search for the girl, the long interrogation, psychological vulnerability, and fear of the death penalty led to the false confession by Thibodaux (Leo, 2008). This case is a great example of

Miscarriages of justices occur due to many variables including faulty or wrong confessions, faulty identifications, wrongful DNA evidence, and the police’s overreach of power. On February 9, 1978, a student from the College of William and Mary, located in Williamsburg, Virginia was sexually assaulted at gunpoint. When the police arrived at the scene, she described her assailant as an African-American male about 5’6 in height and weighing around 145. Having gathered this information, the victim agreed to identify her assailant through photo arrays at the police station. Bennett Barbour was identified arrested and in the span of about two months was charged with rape on April 14, 1978. Despite having an alibi, not matching the victim’s description, and having brittle bone disease Barbour was declared guilty by a jury. Barbour’s case is representative of the many cases in which wrongful eyewitness testimony produces miscarriages of justice. Bennett Barbour served 5 years in prison and 29 years of parole until he was cleared of his charges due to DNA evidence when the Virginia Supreme Court cleared his charges.

When this Central park case was made public, the New York Police Department and District Attorney office’s main focus was to solve the case as quickly as possible. When the five teenagers were found “wilding” in the park the night of the women’s death, the police believed they had found the suspects. The police were so confident of the teenager’s guiltiness, the five boys were interrogated of their involvement in the crime. The police used their authority and persuasion to get the boys to confess and promise them that they would go home if they talked. Through strenuous and intense interrogation, the five boys confessed to the killing and rape of the young women on videotape. These confessions were given even though

Truth, whether you like it or not it is always there. Sometimes that’s a good thing sometimes a bad thing. But it’s still the truth and it is important to have before you make any big decisions. John Oliver is a good example as he always is looking and telling the truth even when it’s hard to hear. In one episode he goes over the Miss America Pageant and when they clam something that John finds suspicious he goes through and digs into information searching for the truth.

False convictions are an ongoing dilemma in criminal cases. The available research is a significant barrier to understanding the prevalence of suspects being convicted of crimes they did not commit. Ethical considerations and variations in individual law enforcement agency policies contribute to the limited availability of records that often are fragmented, incomplete, and difficult to translate. Critical Information does not flow fluidly across the over the 3,000 counties represented in the United States. The multifaceted nature of crimes results in unlimited categorical variables that may influence outcomes of cases and pose extreme difficulty in uncovering mistaken convictions. There is an overwhelming lack of satisfactory data demonstrating that due process safeguards reach a standard in which capital punishment can be upheld as a constitutional, ethical, and moral option for the overall carriage of justice. The opposite is true, the speculative character and lack of concrete research about false convictions are proof that capital punishment, in the face of executions of innocent human beings, is a negligent, illegitimate, and unjust punishment that should be abolished.

Think of how many lies a person tells within their life time. Now imagine that one simple lie making someone spend 10 years behind bars. Many know how easy it is to lie about one little thing, but in the court room lying is a serious issue. False witness confessions show how easy it is to send someone innocent to prison, and must be prevented by recording a video of confessions and DNA testing. The cause of this problem is trying to be helped through video recording and DNA testing. However, innocent people are being convicted and its becoming a huge problem in the judicial system.

False confessions have been a leading factor in destroying the lives of many innocent people. Since the advances of technology, victims of false confessions have been exonerated from the charges previously placed on them while others are still fighting for innocence or died a criminal. One technological advance that has exonerated many individuals is DNA testing. According to Randy James, DNA testing was discovered in 1985 and was first used in court to convict Tommie Lee Andrews (Time, 2009). Today many Americans are convicted because of false confessions that have not yet been overturned with new evidence (Kassin, 2014). Although DNA testing has led to freedom for many innocent Americans, there are still many innocent people who are locked

     There has been many inmates sentenced to death row that innocent. Since 1973, more than 99 people have been released from prison after being sentenced to death despite their innocence, The Social Psychology of Police Interrogation: The