Norfolk Four Compare And Contrast Essay

542 Words2 Pages

Tragically, the Guildford Four and the Norfolk Four cases share many similarity despite the fact that they happened two decades. In both cases four innocent people found themselves incarcerated for falsely confessing to crimes they did commit due to cognitive error.
In both cases, confirmation bias and investigative bias played a considerable role in all eight false confessions; as well as psychological coercion and the abuse of power by investigators when interrogating the suspects. Many situational and individual factors came into play during the case such as the amount of time all eight were interrogated, intrinsic and extrinsic evidence/ maximization used against them. For example, both Joe Dick and Carole Richardson were the most susceptible to psychological manipulation. Joe because of possible cognitive reasoning’s that I personally feel weren’t mentioned, but was implied; Richardson because of substance abuse during the period in which she was investigated.
In the Norfolk four case intrinsic evidence such as DNA testing, polygraph results being withheld, along with Joe’s suggestibility, …show more content…

The Irish Republican Army during the 1970’s were responsible for various bombings in England; that lead to the creation of the Prevention of Terrorism Act in 1974. The Prevention of Terrorism Act made “membership of and support for the IRA an offense” (p.47). It also gave the British government the power to arrest and restrict citizens and detain them for forty-eight hours- five days by extension even with sufficient evidence. This lead to the arrest of Paul Hill, Gerard Conlon Patrick Armstrong and Carole Richardson. Unlike the Norfolk four, these individuals were subjected to harsher treatments due to the nature of the crime and recent passing of the terrorist bill. For example, while the Norfolk four weren’t physically harmed, the Guildford

Open Document