Psychologiy in the Justice System

701 Words2 Pages

This article from the New York Times newspaper points out one of the most relevant and controversial topics in the field of Psychology in the Justice System: the confessions, their relevance and impact as an important (sometimes taken as irrefutable) proof of evidence in a trial and the questionable reliability that they have under certain circumstances. It shows how the suspect gave the confession after 12 hours of interrogation and later on retracted part of it, alleging ‘so much pressure’ sustained during such a long period of time. How a false confession could have been proved or unproved easily with a proper videotape of the whole interrogation and confession processes, but how only the confession was recorded (which is the standard practice in New York). This fact gave and gives room for doubts about the police techniques and the possible over-pressure and coercion during the unreasonably long interview, and makes difficult to demonstrate the truth of the confession or the suspicions about the irregular techniques. The article also comments how the implementation of videotaping in interrogations is being slow in many departments and how some detectives object this measure saying it is expensive, impractical and risky (as it could be taken as a tool for criminals).

On the one hand, the goal of an interrogation or interpellation is to extract important information aiming to find the culprit of the specific fault, and as it is an anti-natural and un-evolutionary behaviour of human beings to act against their own well-being and survival instinct, it would definitely be really difficult to obtain any evidence without a certain amount of persuasion. Then, it becomes obvious that no police interrogation is completely free of coerc...

... middle of paper ...

...
From my point of view, the videotaping of the interrogation and confession processes is an essential and unavoidable measure that should be mandatory and worldwide implemented in all the justice systems. It should not be taken as a waste of money but as an inversion for the sake of justice. In a current high-tech computerized world, we cannot allow a partially recorded interview that could be taken as manipulated or biased. This measure can whether be useful for the police department to avoid the false accusations about coercive and inhumanly inquisitorial techniques during the interrogations and avoid the invalidation of the true confessions based on partial and biased recordings or for the innocent people to evidence the misuse of psychological practice. So, definitely something valuable in the way to the truth and an important progress in psychology and justice.

Open Document