Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 May 23;25(4):539-549.
doi: 10.1080/13218719.2018.1463874. eCollection 2018.

Juror perceptions of false confessions versus witness recantations

Paula A Bernhard  1 , Rowland S Miller  1
Affiliations

Juror perceptions of false confessions versus witness recantations

Paula A Bernhard et al. Psychiatr Psychol Law. .

Abstract

In false confessions, someone confesses to a crime but then later retracts that confession, whereas in witness recantations, an eyewitness testifies but then later revokes that testimony. The revocations are conceptually similar, but they differ in the author of the revocation - the defendant versus a third party. The current study examines differences in juror perceptions of the legitimacy of false confessions versus witness recantations, and also takes contextual influences (coercion and crime severity) into account. False confessions were found to be judged more harshly than witness recantations, but, surprisingly, levels of coercion and the severity of the crime did not influence decision-making in the manner that the original hypotheses predicted. Implications for the application of this research are discussed.

Keywords: false confession; juror; witness recantation; wrongful conviction.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Armbrust S. (2008). Reevaluating recanting witnesses: Why the red-headed stepchild of new evidence deserves another look. Boston College Third World Law Journal, 28(1), 75–104.
    1. Blandón-Gitlin I., Sperry K., & Leo R. (2011). Jurors believe interrogation tactics are not likely to elicit false confessions: Will expert witness testimony inform them otherwise? Psychology, Crime & Law, 17, 239–260. doi: 10.1080/10683160903113699 - DOI
    1. Buhrmester M., Kwang T., & Gosling S. D. (2011). Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Sciences, 6, 3–5. doi: 10.1177/1745691610393980 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Carlsmith K. M., Darley J. M., & Robinson P. H. (2002). Why do we punish? Deterrence and just deserts as motives for punishment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 284–299. - PubMed
    1. Devine D. J. (2012). Jury decision making: The state of the science. New York: New York University.

LinkOut - more resources