Juvenile Interrogation Reforms

By Lucy Collins | Published on  

As a researcher, I study how kids function in a legal system that was designed for adults. My goal is to conduct scientific research that helps us understand the challenges faced by juveniles in the US legal system. One of the biggest challenges they face is false confessions.

You may have heard of the Brendan Dassey case, which made its way into a popular Netflix series. Brendan was a 16-year-old with an IQ around 70 when he was interrogated by police. They convinced him to confess to a murder and sexual assault that he didn’t commit. Brendan’s case is unique because it led to intense public outrage, but the sad truth is that false confessions occur more often than we think.

Research has found that false confessions were present in approximately 25 percent of wrongful convictions of people later exonerated by DNA evidence. In other words, innocent people confessed to crimes they didn’t commit. Juveniles are particularly vulnerable to providing false confessions. In one study, 42 percent of juveniles had falsely confessed compared to only 8 percent of adults.

The problem is that police are allowed to interrogate juveniles just like adults. They can lie to them and use tactics that increase the risk of false confession. In our research, we found that most incarcerated teens we interviewed reported high-pressure police interrogations without lawyers or parents present. More than 80 percent described being threatened by the police, including with the possibility of being raped or killed in jail or being tried as an adult.

This kind of treatment is designed to make suspects feel like denials are pointless and confession is the only option. Minimization and maximization strategies are used to manipulate suspects into confessing. Minimization strategies convey sympathy and understanding to the suspect, implying that a confession will result in more lenient treatment. Maximization strategies are designed to make suspects feel like denials are pointless and confession is the only option.

The problem is that juveniles are more suggestible and susceptible to social influence, like the intense pressure accusations and suggestions coming from authority figures in interrogations. The good news is that there are steps we can take to prevent false confessions. We need to educate law enforcement, attorneys, judges, and jurors on juveniles’ developmental limitations and how they can play out in a high-stakes interrogation. We also need to consider having special protections in place for juveniles, such as having an attorney or trained child advocate present during interrogations.

As a parent and a researcher, I believe we can do better. We can take steps to prevent another Brendan Dassey while still getting the crucial information that we need from children and teens to solve crimes.

The case of Brendan Dassey has gained significant attention in recent years, largely due to the Netflix series “Making a Murderer.” Dassey was a 16-year-old high school student with an IQ of around 70 when he was interrogated by police in March of 2006. During the interrogation, which lasted for four hours, police told Brendan that honesty would “set him free,” but they were already convinced of his guilt. Brendan’s confession, which many believe to be false and didn’t match the physical evidence of the crime, was enough to convict him of murder and sexual assault in 2007.

What’s shocking about this case is that there was no physical evidence against Brendan. It was solely his own words that sent him to prison for nearly a decade until a judge overturned his conviction just a few months ago. The case highlights the issue of false confessions and how they can lead to wrongful convictions.

As a forensic developmental psychologist, I’ve studied cases like Brendan’s to understand how kids function in a legal system designed for adults. False confessions, especially among juveniles, are more common than you might think. Studies have shown that false confessions or admissions were present in approximately 25 percent of wrongful convictions of people later exonerated by DNA evidence.

In the case of Brendan Dassey, police used common interrogation techniques that can increase the risk of false confession. They used maximization strategies, like threats and intimidation, to make Brendan feel like denial was pointless and confession was his only option. They also used minimization strategies, like sympathy and understanding, to imply that a confession would result in more lenient treatment. These tactics can be especially effective among adolescents, who are more suggestible and susceptible to social influence.

The fact that police can interrogate juveniles just like adults in the US is a major problem. Most juveniles don’t understand their rights and don’t have the legal knowledge to make informed decisions. As a result, they may waive their Miranda rights without fully understanding the consequences.

In conclusion, the Brendan Dassey case is just one example of how police interrogation can lead to a wrongful conviction, especially among juveniles. We need to educate law enforcement, attorneys, judges, and jurors on juveniles’ developmental limitations and how they can play out in a high-stakes interrogation. We also need to consider having special protections in place for juveniles, such as having an appropriate adult safeguard, like a parent or trained child advocate, present during interrogations. By taking these steps, we can work towards preventing another wrongful conviction like Brendan’s.

One of the key factors that contribute to the false confessions of juveniles is their brain development. The prefrontal cortex, responsible for decision-making, impulse control, and judgment, doesn’t fully develop until the mid-twenties. As a result, adolescents are more susceptible to peer pressure, impulsivity, and suggestion.

When police officers interrogate juveniles, they often use psychologically manipulative tactics, such as lying about evidence, intimidating, or promising leniency in exchange for a confession. These techniques can be particularly effective on teenagers, who are more likely to be influenced by authority figures and fear the consequences of not cooperating.

Research has shown that young people may not fully understand the implications of waiving their Miranda rights, as they may not comprehend the legal jargon used in the warnings. In addition, juveniles with mental health issues or intellectual disabilities may be even more vulnerable to coercion and have a harder time understanding what is happening during an interrogation.

It’s important for law enforcement officials to understand the impact of brain development on juvenile behavior and adjust their tactics accordingly. This means taking into account the age, maturity level, and cognitive ability of the person being interrogated, and avoiding manipulative techniques that can result in false confessions. It’s essential to ensure that the rights of young people are protected and that they receive fair treatment in the criminal justice system.

Police interrogations can be intense and high-pressure situations for anyone, but they can be particularly overwhelming for juveniles. During an interrogation, police officers may use a variety of tactics to extract information from the suspect, including minimization and maximization strategies.

Minimization is a technique used by officers to downplay the seriousness of the crime and make the suspect feel more comfortable. They may tell the suspect that they understand why they committed the crime and that it’s not such a big deal. The goal is to make the suspect feel more relaxed and willing to talk.

On the other hand, maximization is a strategy used to make the suspect feel like the evidence against them is overwhelming and that they have no choice but to confess. This can involve threats of severe consequences, such as a long prison sentence or even the death penalty, as well as exaggeration of the evidence against the suspect.

Both minimization and maximization strategies can be effective in drawing out a confession, but they can also be manipulative and coercive. Juveniles, in particular, may be more susceptible to these tactics due to their underdeveloped decision-making abilities and lack of experience with the legal system.

It’s important to understand the power of these strategies and how they can impact a suspect’s decision to confess. As a society, we must ensure that the tactics used by law enforcement during interrogations are fair, ethical, and do not violate the suspect’s rights.

Law enforcement officers have a challenging job that involves communicating with individuals of all ages and backgrounds. However, when it comes to communicating with children and adolescents, there are unique challenges that require specialized training.

Children and adolescents are not simply “miniature adults,” as their brains are still developing, and they may not have fully developed reasoning and decision-making skills. Therefore, it is crucial for law enforcement officers to have a thorough understanding of child and adolescent development to effectively communicate with them during interrogations.

Unfortunately, many law enforcement officers lack the necessary training to communicate with minors effectively. As a result, they may resort to tactics that can be misleading or coercive, resulting in false confessions.

Specialized training in child and adolescent development can help law enforcement officers understand the specific challenges involved in communicating with minors. This training can also provide them with strategies for building rapport, using age-appropriate language, and avoiding tactics that could lead to false confessions.

In conclusion, specialized training in communicating with children and adolescents is crucial for law enforcement officers. It can help ensure that minors are treated fairly during interrogations and can prevent false confessions, ultimately leading to a more just legal system.

It’s common knowledge that the presence of a lawyer during police interrogations is crucial, but what about the presence of a parent or guardian? Surprisingly, in many jurisdictions in the United States, there is no requirement for parents to be present when their child is being interrogated by the police.

Studies have shown that the absence of a parent during interrogations can have a significant impact on a child’s ability to understand and participate in the process. Children are often intimidated by the police and may not fully comprehend the seriousness of the situation. Without a parent present to offer emotional support and explain the situation, children may be more likely to give false confessions or simply agree to whatever the police say in order to end the interrogation.

Furthermore, the presence of a parent can help ensure that the child’s legal rights are protected. Parents can help ensure that their child is not coerced or threatened during questioning and can help their child understand the implications of waiving their Miranda rights.

Despite these benefits, many states still do not require parental presence during interrogations. It’s crucial that we recognize the importance of parental involvement in these situations and work to enact policies that protect children’s rights and ensure fair treatment in the legal system.

False confessions can be a devastating blow to the criminal justice system, causing wrongful convictions and devastating consequences for innocent people. It can be difficult to understand why someone would falsely confess to a crime they did not commit.

One factor is the shock and trauma of being accused of a crime. Being taken into custody, interrogated, and questioned by authority figures can be intimidating and disorienting. In some cases, the person being interrogated may be sleep-deprived, hungry, or thirsty, which can affect their judgment and ability to think clearly.

Additionally, interrogators may use techniques such as minimization or maximization to manipulate the person being questioned. Minimization may involve downplaying the severity of the crime or making the person feel like they are not as bad as others who have committed the same crime. Maximization, on the other hand, may involve exaggerating the severity of the crime or threatening the person with severe consequences if they do not confess.

Another contributing factor is the lack of parental or legal representation during interrogations, particularly for juveniles. Without a trusted adult present, the person being interrogated may feel alone and vulnerable, leading them to make false statements or even confess to a crime they did not commit.

It is crucial for law enforcement officers to receive specialized training in how to talk to children and adolescents and understand the impact of their brain development on their ability to make sound decisions. Additionally, legal systems should prioritize the presence of a parent or legal representative during interrogations, particularly for juveniles.

To overcome the shock of false confessions, it is important to educate the public and raise awareness about the prevalence and consequences of wrongful convictions. By understanding the root causes of false confessions, we can work towards preventing them from occurring and ensuring justice for all.

The issue of false confessions by juveniles in the US legal system during interrogations is a serious problem that demands immediate attention. It is crucial that we take action to better protect young people from the damaging consequences of false confessions.

One of the most important steps that we can take is to ensure that law enforcement officers receive specialized training in how to communicate with children and adolescents during interrogations. This training should include information on the unique developmental stages of young people, as well as strategies for building rapport and maintaining a positive environment.

Another key factor in preventing false confessions is the presence of a parent or guardian during interrogations. Research has shown that when parents are present, they can help protect their children’s rights and provide emotional support during a stressful and potentially traumatic experience.

In addition, it is important to educate the public, including parents and young people themselves, about the risks of false confessions and how to protect oneself during interrogations. This includes understanding one’s legal rights, being aware of police interrogation tactics, and seeking legal counsel if necessary.

Ultimately, the protection of juveniles in the US legal system during interrogations is a responsibility that falls on all of us. By working together and taking action, we can ensure that young people are treated fairly and justly in our legal system, and that false confessions are prevented from causing further harm.

The issue of false confessions among juveniles in the US legal system is a serious problem that cannot be ignored. It is essential to understand the vulnerabilities of young people and how police interrogation tactics can manipulate and coerce them into admitting guilt for crimes they did not commit.

While it is important to hold individuals accountable for their actions, it is equally important to protect their rights, especially when it comes to minors who may not fully understand the consequences of their words or actions. This requires specialized training for law enforcement officers and the presence of a parent or guardian during interrogations to ensure that the juvenile’s rights are not violated.

As a society, we must demand better protection for juveniles in the US legal system and advocate for policy changes that ensure their fair treatment. False confessions can have devastating consequences not only for the individual but also for their families and communities. It is our responsibility to address this issue and work towards a more just and equitable system for all.