Psyc335 Test 2 - Topic summary - revision for test PDF

Preview

Summary

Topic summary - revision for test...

Description

Psyc335 Test 2 – Lab Notes Jury Decision Making LAB NOTES Things to consider Characteristics of:  The jury as a group  The jury as individuals  The defendant  The victim  People in general: attitudes, personality traits  The decision-making process  The evidence  The index of offence: the main thing they did e.g. murder but also might've done fraud If jury dominated by males - give longer sentences Females defendants get given shorter sentences Known criminal record increases conviction rates - hence why its attempted to not know the history of defendant Minorities are given harsher sentences for similar crimes If jury relates to the defendant - same background can make them nicer or harsher Racially similar victims can lead to longer sentencing Higher levels of moral reasoning within the jury related to lower rates of defendant liability (aka. Less convictions) 'Mental Disorders' and the Insanity Plea: Mens rea - intention or knowledge of wrongdoing criminal intent Actus reus - comprises physical components of a crime, physical criminal act of doing the crime When establishing if someone is guilty to convict them - must establish and prove both mens rea and actus reus Intentionality - three components of finding criminal intent  Individual knew right from wrong  They have the ability to understand what they have done  That they have autonomous function - control over their behavior Defendant X - guilty Depression infrequently used as defense - not successful Defendant Y - not guilty Defendant Z - could go either way

Wrongful Convictions Wrongful Conviction: False Confession Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey (man on the left) Steven Avery Rape and murder Sentenced to 32 years in prison Was released after serving 18 years in prison after being found innocent 2 years later - photographer went missing Theresa, her last appointment was with Steven Avery He was arrested and charged with her murder Brendan Dassey - Steven Avery's nephew 16 year old high school student lived next to his uncle Brendan was interviewed - saw Theresa driving away When interviewed again - said he saw body parts in the bonfire with his father Interviewed again - the one we are watching during lab now  At this point, Steven Avery has been convicted and is in prison Brendan Dassey Interview Video: 1. What personal factors might make someone susceptible to a false confession? Which of the factors appear to be present for Brendan? Relationship to the other person accused - nephew of man convicted Age - 16 years old, young - wanting to please the police Shy/withdrawn Intellectually - not very articulate  He doesn’t seem to realize that he is implicating himself in the crime Personal factors - susceptible to false confessions Young or old people Low IQ

2. What are some of the important features of the interview environment? How might these increase the risk of a false confession? Very leading questions asked He is sitting backed into the corner, police officers close up to his face Camera pressure Absence of lawyer or support person - very isolated, there for 4 hours Couch - making it feel more informal

3. What approach do the interviewer's take? How might this impact Brendan's perception of the situation? They are really nice to him, try to make him feel comfortable that they are on his side Reassuring him that he won’t get in trouble

Led him on him - encourages him to admit to things "come on, be honest, we already know what happened" Leading questions were asked Maximization/minimization  It is so important you tell us the truth, but don’t worry you telling us wont get you in trouble Brendan Dassey Interview Transcript 1. What type of questions do the Police ask Brendan? How might these facilitate a false confession?  Very leading questions 2. What aspects of good interviewing practice are evident in this transcript?  Some open ended questions: what happened next? What else?  Sometimes when they asked questions they just waited for him to answer 3. Is there any evidence of the Police introducing information into the interview that Brendan wasn’t previously aware of? What are the risks of doing this? In what situations might it be okay to do this?  When they asked who shot her in the head, before that he didn’t remember anything else but once suggested that she had been shot  Changed ropes to handcuffs and wasn’t negated by him We would argue this is a coerced/compliant confession Pressured to go along with it all Hard to know how he would of responded if it had been more coherent open ended and useful way of questioning General questions 1. Types of false confessions.  Coerced/compliant confession 2. Why did the jury still convict?  People would question why would you confess if you never committed the crime? 3. Interviewing of children  No support person  Don’t understand consequences of their actions 4. Report for the NZ Police  Remove power imbalance  Ask open ended questions

Lab 3 – Jury Decision Making ‘Mental Disorders’ and the insanity plea:  How does a clinical diagnosis influence jury judgments of criminal liability?

Criminal liability:  Mens rea – guilty mind/criminal intent  Actus rea – guilty act/criminal act  You must establish both of these to get a guilty verdict i.e., that they actually did it and that they intended to do it How to establish intent:  You need the individual to know right from wrong  They need to understand what they have done  They need to have autonomous function Lab 4 – Wrongful Convictions Case: Murder conviction may have been obtained with a false confession Main causes of wrongful convictions:  Eyewitness misidentification (77%)  Unvalidated/improper forensics (52%)  False confessions (23%)  Informants/snitches Brendan Dassey Interview Video 1. What personal factors might make someone susceptible to a false confession? Which of these factors appear to be present for Brendan?  Their relationship with the people accused  Age – he is quite young, suggestibility, wanting to please people of authority  He does not seem very intellectually capable in the interview – low IQ, more suggestible, can take on details (creating false memories) that lead to the development of false confessions 2. What are some of the important features of the interview environment? How might these increase the risk of a false confession?  Boxed in, trapped but at the same time really informal  Establishes a power dynamic immediately  Room may give false sense of comfortability because of the couch and the interviewer  No support person or water 3. What approach do the interviewers take? How might this impact Brendan’s perception of the situation?  A lot of leading questions  Gave him praise for admitting things and would not take no for an answer when they denied him  They outnumber him  They keep saying that they know the truth and he just needs to confirm it  They keep calling him out for lying in a friendly, passive way

Maximisation/minimisation – maximising the importance of the suspect saying something and minimising the consequence of saying something Brendan Dassey Interview Transcript 1. What type of questions do the police ask Brendan? How might these facilitate a false confession?  Leading questions  Closed questions  Binary option  This seem to be a coerced compliant confession 2. What aspects of good interviewing practice are evident in this transcript?  Some open questions “what happened next?”  Sometimes the interviewers just wait for Brendan to answer 3. Is there any evidence of the Police introducing information into the interview that Brendan wasn’t previously aware of? What are the risks of doing this? In what situations might it be ok to do this?  “alright I’m just going to come out and ask you. Who shot her in the head?”  Brendan claims to have forgotten this had happened  Interviewers changed ropes to handcuffs in the interview General Questions 1. What are the different types of false confessions, and if this was a false confession, which type would you be most likely to classify it as?  Coerced compliant confession 2. At his trial, Brendan completely recanted his confession. There was also non scientific evidence placing Brendan at the crime scene. Why do you think the jury still chose to convict?  Because they weren’t aware that memory is not reliable, juries tend to believe confessions even if they are retracted  The prosecutor stated that “people who are innocent do not confess” and said that the lack of scientific evidence is because they had time to clean up 3. Imagine you are asked to prepare a report for the NZ Police, advising them about procedures they should and should not use when interrogating suspects. Based on recommendations on how to avoid a false confession.  Use open questions  Try as hard as you can to educate the subject on their rights  Give them the chance for a break, food, bathroom  Make them aware that they can have a support person  Think about the timing - morning as opposed to evening  Think about your demeanour  If the interviewer is congratulating certain responses they are more likely to be given

Lab 5 – Sexual Offending

Child Sexual Offending – Ward’s “Implicit Theories” theory  Each individual child sexual offender has a “theory” about the world – individual view of the world  i.e. your view of the world is your theory of the world  doesn’t look at anything biological, really hones in on the idea of implicit beliefes about the world  single-factor – we can’t expect it to explain everything about child sexual offending  e.g., “the world is a dangerous place so I go for what is safe, easy and accessible”.  May explain the psychological part of why they offend  Implicit theories: o 1. Children as sexual objects: children are capable of desiring and enjoying sex and have adult sexual motivations. o 2. Nature of harms: sexual molesting is not harmful or is beneficial o 3. Uncontrollability: offending behaviour is outside the offender’s control o 4. Entitlement: the offender’s needs or wants supersede those of others o 5. Dangerous world: the world is a hostile and dangerous place where no-one or only children can be trusted Evaluating Ward’s “Implicit Theories” Theory 1. empirical adequacy – is the theory supported empirically? 2. Internal coherence – does the theory integrate key constructs in a logical, coherent way? 3. Explanatory depth – does the theory outline and explain deep underlying mechanisms? 4. Heuristic value – does the theory generate new predictions, research, knowledge, possibly treatment interventions in the forensic context? 5. Unifying power – does the theory combine previously separated theories to create new insight? 6. Simplicity 7. External consistency – with other background theories...