Week 4 |
Interviewing Victims / False Memories Interview Subject is a witness to a crime (victim) Goal: get accurate information to facilitate the investigation Witnesses (children) can provide false information → wrongful convictions Memory is malleable (easily changed/ contaminated) Conventional Interview Warm-up period Open-ended questions Phrase questions positively, NOT suggestively Place questions in a chronological order Wrap Up Problem: Witnesses often don’t remember much about the crime
Interrogation Misinformation Effects - Loftus & Palmer Eyewitnesses reconstruct their memories when questioned about the event Super famous accident happen (hit/ smashed into) Little fender bender First study of misinformation effects When asked how fast they were going or if there was glass? Response is not a conscious deliberation - you just have the memory of glass on the ground Tricky to get information without changing the memory of the witnesses
Forensic Hypnosis An investigative memory retrieval technique used to enhance recall in legally relevant situations Hypnosis is a state of increased receptivity to suggestion - an altered state of consciousness Problems: Constructing false memory without realizing it Vulnerable to suggestive questioning Trying to get at the memory - struggling to get subject to say more
1985 - American Medical Association - use of hypnosis limits investigative process and results not being used as evidence in court 1976 - Chowchilla kidnapping case Wasn’t able to remember anything but then the license plate number was uncovered during hypnosis → led to the capture of kidnappers Sensational case, still talked about in the news today Bus load of children plus driver kidnapped, forced into a buried moving truck, 16 hours later they escaped Quarry owner’s son plus two others (GTA) sentenced
Few Courts allow hypnotically induced information in court,
Cognitive Interview Used mostly with adults, can be used with children Mnemonics (memory jogging techniques) It is not implanting any memories
Interview Considerations Memories can degrade, have to “catch” it early Early interviews - to minimize forgetting, not letting it fade Use proper techniques IF memory has not yet been contaminated → eyewitness provides RELIABLE information
Real World Studies of Forensic Interviews How do we know we get good information from these people, if there has been a minimization of contamination, but never be able to eliminate that some time has passed between crime and interview Sometimes CCTV can verify recollections 96% of “action details” were correct Details of armed robbers were 87% correct Useful information Witnesses are remembering pretty accurately Better to have this information than not having it, it will help facilitate the investigation
Conversations between witnesses before their interviews → leads to contaminated memories Interview takeaways! Interview witness early - minimize forgetting Use proper interview techniques Avoid being misleading Use open-ended questions
No contamination + proper interview technique = RELIABLE information
Reliable Information Recalled with high confidence = accurate Recalled with low confidence = error prone Right about 50% of the time (in the study) Doesn’t mean you’re always correct, you can let the police know you’re making a mistake/ unsure Maybe a mistake → don’t take information too seriously
PAY ATTENTION TO WITNESS CONFIDENCE
Witness confidence Study: interviewed → recall details → compute accuracy score Correct details/ (correct details + incorrect details) Long time passes between event and recall → contaminated and unreliable Strong relationship between confidence and accuracy Suggestion: witnesses make mistakes in criminal trials - easy to contaminate, suggest better way to think is that any forensic evidence can be contaminated Easy to contaminate eyewitness memory, HAVE to test uncontaminated eyewitness memory
High confidence at trial puts people in prison Interview them the wrong way Actual Police Interview
McMartin Preschool Case 200 parents were sent letters that maybe their children were molested 1980s Improper interviewing techniques implanted false memories of sexual abuse into lots of children Case fell apart due to lack of evidence
Interviewing Children/ Juveniles Spontaneous report, with consistent/ credible age-appropriate language → likely very credible report of abuse Reliable interview if interviewer uses open-ended/ non-leading questions → reliable/ forensically useful
NICHD investigative protocol Cognitive interview with adults can be used with children, not used often because specific protocol for children has been adopted Introduce Rapport-building phase DON’T SAY DO SAY Facilitators Invitations Cued Invitations
There is measurable improvement when NICHD protocol is used In-practice training is very necessary
Recovered Memory Epidemic Ability to fake memory Step 1: 20 adult confederates recruited family member who never taken a hot air balloon ride Step 2: digitized 3 true events, 1 edited event into the hot air balloon scene Step 3: interviewed the family member 3 times Critical Finding - amount of people who remembered they went up over time though it didn’t happen Percent of people who think the false memory is real continues to go up
Guided Imagery Technique used in therapy Used to target psychological problems caused by repressed memories Study performed assessed the efficacy of different memory retrieval techniques, and the interviewer used context reinstatement and guided imagery to help the subject remember the event Might help to get a memory that is there Clear memory that was thought happened even though it didn’t, person loses track of where the memory came from Laying down false memory in guided imagery → memories change, they remain crystal clear, accuracy goes down, to him it feels like there is some possibility that is really happened & they are pulling it from their memory
Williams 1994 Unwillingness to report sexual trauma to interviewer doesn’t mean it was forgotten Infantile amnesia - thought to be younger than 3 years old before memories form Individuals can forget childhood abuse and remember it later
Before the big arguments of Elizabeth Loftus - Ross Cheit recovered memory of abuse by administrator of boy’s camp - sounds like a memory that was long gone came back Memory can’t tell you what is the truth from long ago versus a false memory
|
Week 5 |
Eyewitness Identification Face recognition (police lineup) Not recall of details (police interview) Eyewitness misidentification played a role in ~70% of wrongful conviction cases - contributing to an average of 14 years in prison Ronald Cotton Wrong thinking Sequential lineups reduce misidentification and increase accuracy compared to traditional simultaneous lineups - police departments switched to this method for a while Eyewitness confidence should be ignored by judges and jurors
Everyone in the lineup should match the physical description provided by the eyewitness Fair line up that is not too hard to be of any use Natural variability in facial features Same race, gender, rough age = fair line up
3 possible outcomes to a lineup (police now use photo lineups) 1. Identify the suspect 2. Identify a filler 3. Reject the lineup (No ID) Actual eyewitnesses you wouldn’t know in a real world Fillers: All are known to be innocent If the witness picks the suspect, trouble happens
Simultaneous vs Sequential Diagnosticity Ratio Big reduction in false alarm rate, you want fewer people being incorrectly sent to prison Usually higher for the sequential calculation Mostly changing by the decrease in the false alarm rate Need to know the hit rate AND the false alarm rate HAVE TO DO ROC ANALYSIS - ALWAYS PLOT THEM ON THE ROC If hit and false alarm rates both change in the same direction → you’re in the danger zone Higher ROC curve = greater discriminability Lineup procedure associated with greater discriminability is diagnostically superior
Diagnosticity ratio doesn’t tell you anything, you’re not picking the better procedure 1. ROC each point is a hit rate and a false alarm rate - obtained by setting the criterion 2. Hit rate divided by false alarm rate = diagnosticity ratio 3. I can compute a DR for each point on the ROC
You want to be on the higher ROC, not fussing about the DR
Every ROC analysis shows that simultaneous is better All significant results favored simultaneous Mistake made because they relied on the diagnosticity ratio instead of the ROC Simultaneous lineup is better because it gives you a higher ROC Key is having a clear distinction between the first memory test and the last Only listen to the confidence report of the first memory test Test early - uncontaminated memory: least amount of forgetting, least amount of contamination, least amount of false memory growth
Confidence-Accuracy Relationship (so important!) 50/50 change the suspect is guilty 100 people land on the “suspect”: 70% chance suspect is guilty - witness picks suspect → police become more certain he is guilty 50 people land on the fillers 50 people rejected 100 always pick the suspect, they never pick a filler/ reject a line up If witness picks a suspect from a lineup - initial simultaneous lineup - increases probability that it is a guilty guy - not unreliable If true, bonus is - if they don’t pick the suspect (all the lineups where that doesn’t happen) most of them are going to be innocent - push/ pull Pick suspect - increase chances you get right guy Don’t pick suspect - reduces confidence of if you got the right guy non-ID on the first test is evidence of innocence Outcomes all increase estimates of guilt Start at 50/50 low confidence means high risk of making an error Barely increases estimates at all Definition of eyewitness memory
Show up is not as good as a lineup High confidence → 80% accuracy, which is way better than 50/50 Wouldn’t convict more than reasonable doubt on this but it can help on the first test, lineup (maybe even showups) Not a lot of high confidence errors
Low confidence → 50 % correctness
|
Week 6 |
Criminal Profiling Criminal profiler A person who infers the personality, behavior, motivation and demographics of a suspect based on information gathered from a crime scene Often known as an “unsub” What can they figure out by analyzing the crime scene
Modus operandi - MO - method of observation Signature Behaviors the offender must do to fulfill an emotional need/ fantasy Sometimes present, categorized as anything they do consistently
History of Criminal Profiling Biggest problem is trying stuff out without a theoretical reason - trying it because it might be true based on their gut instinct Cesare Lobroso thought there was physical characteristics of criminals - not a widely accepted theory today
Jack the Ripper 5 women killed on separate incidents No anatomy knowledge, harmless looking man, strong, daring, loner - unknown on the accuracy because he was never caught
Modern Day Profiling “Father of profiling” John Douglas 25 years with FBI Interviewed serial killers/ rapists Teaches profiling techniques at FBI Wrote a book - thought he would make some money
Problem Typological offender profiling Basic idea that they came up with - different kinds of offenders - not everyone's the same - type predicts future behavior Different types of offenders Behavioral evidence can indication what type of offender committed the crime Offender type → predict future behavior For serial violence crimes - arsonists, serial bombers, serial murderers/ rapists
Serial killer definition Three or more separate events in three or more separate locations with an emotional cooling off period in between homicides Mass murder - 3+ persons killed together Spree Killing - 3+ persons killed in a short period of time at different locations
Characteristics of Serial Killers/ Victims Female Serial Murderers Women thought to be more reactive than predatory Bella Gunness Jane Toppan 15-20% of American serial killers are women - predominantly white although so few you can’t have a good racial breakdown Women tend to kill quietly Women tend to pick individuals who depend on them Black Widow Female x poison Bella Gunness
Angel of Death
Category Schemes Profiling serial killer Hit - profile that killer would return to the scene of the crime False Alarm Richard Jewell, mistaken fit the profile and was wrongfully arrested Eric Rudolph was the Summer Olympic bomber
Want to know how often you get it right, everything is sometimes right and sometimes wrong
Most criminal profilers are FBI agents with job experience Two different approaches Meta analysis Lack of scientific evidence makes profiling questionable Case Linkage Analysis uses ROC, successfully links crimes → offense series → offender
Linkage Analysis Geographic Profiling - “Journey to Crime” Investigative strategy using locations of a series of crimes → determine the most probable area of the offender’s residence/ place of work Prioritizes areas to search - focuses resources - increases the chances of locating missing/ presumed dead individuals
“Circle Hypothesis” Geomap Future direction: Profiling cybercriminals Psychological Autopsies Attempts to dissect/ examine psychological state of individual prior to death Based on interviews/ records Used in both civil and criminal cases Person performing the autopsy doesn’t make the call - a judge does Important to know the reason for death could be murder/ insurance fraud, etc
|
Week 7 |
Plea Bargaining Despite Innocence |
Eyewitness Identification and Testimony Jennifer Thompson (22) North Carolina 3:00 am, man broke in & raped her When ID suspect, police made a comment “we thought this might be the one” No evidence other than eyewitness DNA exoneration: Ronald Cotton released from prison
Eyewitness describe criminal/ pick suspect - relying on memory Encode: gather information, put it in a form that can be held Storage: holding encoded information in brain over time Retrieval: accessing & pulling out the stored information at later time Errors Information might not be well encoded Attend to & code only a fraction of all the data we see Even when paying attention → attention lapses Memory storage is selective, inexact replica of what happened
Memory traces: Biochemical representations of experiences in brain deteriorate with time Images and sounds decay over time Process of retrieval includes reconstruction that is subject to error
374 cases only eyewitness testimony Neil v. Biggers (1972) & Manson v. Braithwaite (1977) Manson Criteria 5 factors that should be taken into account to evaluate accuracy Witness’s opportunity to view the perpetrator Witness’s level of attention The accuracy of the witness’s previous description of offender Witness’s degree of certainty Amount of time between witnessing crime & ID
Logical & difficult to apply to actual crimes Degree of certainty at trial can be highly misleading
Accuracy improves if witness look at face of criminal longer (probably during encoding) People consistently overestimate duration of brief events by 3-4 times (especially if stressful) Have to rely on self-report of eyewitnesses to evaluate Five Manson criteria (certainty, view, attention)
Corrupted by the use of suggestive questioning, ID produces → misleading indicators Voir dire - the questioning of potential jurors during selection Jurors place undue faith in reliability of eyewitness Emilio Meza robbed Sung Woo at gunpoint - allegedly Heightened arousal enhances memory Weapon Focus Effect: Scripts: Widely held beliefs about sequence of actions Will typically occur in particular situations Enable processing of information Error: Elements of scripts are found → even when it didn’t happen
Elizabeth Loftus Retrieval Inhibition Eyewitness’s initial expression of high confidence in an identification is a strong indicator of accuracy Confidence may be misleading if lineup is poorly constructed or if witness is exposed to biasing information Witness who began with tentative description → changes opinion to convict, free of all doubt
Post-Identification feedback effect: Tendency for biased feedback to distort memory of witness Witnesses were not aware they had been swayed by feedback Confirming feedback to witness → causes false memory of being very certain at time of initial ID Disconfirming feedback to witness → causes uncertainty at the time of initial ID
Cognitive Dissonance Once you commit to particular course of action, you will become motivated to justify that course of action Might explain post-confidence boost in eyewitness identifications ID someone → dissonant (inconsistent) with knowledge that you were uncertain about identification
Culprit-present/ target-present lineup: China - 1 public camera for every 2 people FRT- facial recognition technology Distance between the eyes, width/length of nose shape of eye sockets, length of jawline Challenge: facial alterings
Justice System DOES NOT control who witnesses a crime observation/ race of victim different races of criminals Estimator variables helpful in estimating accuracy of ID System Variables: factors that are under control of the justice system
Resistance to carrying out reform Culprit-Absent Lineups 68% witnesses say don’t see culprit - sequential 46% recognition occurs - simultaneous 44% culprit present correctly 10 sequential procedure 52% simultaneous procedure
Memory fades & confidence might grow stronger/ weaker Open ended questions → avoid suggestive lines Familiarity increases the accuracy of description Not discussing with other witnesses → so that memory is not influenced
Required to have concrete evidence of potential guilt to be included in a lineup as the suspect Fillers Bias reducing instructions Remove presumption that witness is obligated to choose someone from available options Police doesn’t know either witness can’t look for “right” answer Statement much be taken immediately after witness ID - before feedback is given
Lineup is unbiased, eyewitness’ confidence Everything should be videotaped Franz Anton Mesmer (German Physician) Psychotherapy Technique for improving athletic performance Enhancing memories of crime victims/ witnesses 1976 Chowchilla Case in California
Cognitive Interview
Criminal Profiling and Psychological Autopsies Profiling Process of drawing inferences about criminal’s personality Behavior, motivations, & demographic characteristics Used by BSU, US, Canada, UK, Sweden, Finland, Germany, Netherlands
Serial Killers Signature 3 Famous Profiles Jack the Ripper Olympic Bomber Mad Bomber 1957-1940 unexploded bomb was found on windowsill of Consolidated Edison Company Terrorized the public by successful planting bombs in NYC Bombing stopped during WW2, started again in 1951-1956 Profile 40-50 year old, Roman Catholic, foreign born, single, living with siblings
George Metesky Single, unemployed, 54, former worker CEC with 2 older sisters Committed to a hospital for the criminally insane
Serial Killers Brain injury that impairs rational thinking Physical, sexual, psychological abuse during childhood Tend not to kill using guns Prefer intimate methods of killing (strangulation, stabbing, torture) alcohol/ drugs to desensitize themselves/ lower inhibitions Show obsessive interest in violent pornography Sexual fantasies rehearsals for crime
Female serial killers - don’t fit this pattern Psychopaths Self-centered, dishonest, undependable, irresponsible behavior for fun Devoid of guilt, empathy, love, callous interpersonal, romantic relationships Overrepresented in prisons Rarely psychotic
Organized Murderers: carefully selecting/ stalking their victims Disorganized Murderers: impulsive, random victims, act on rage Follow the voices in their heads Use any available weapons, leave weapons behind, kill for sexual purpose
4 types of Serial Killers Visionary Mission-oriented Hedonic Power-oriented
Profiles more accurate only for the sex offender cases Implicit biases play more in stressful, quick situations No discernable demographic resemblance of criminals & crimes committed Unwarranted assumptions, inconsistency in behavior of individual criminals Assumptions Crime scene fall on a continuum Combination of organized/ disorganized - 2 typed Crime scene characteristics, not reliably associated with criminal personality
Cross-situational consistency Behavior is powerfully determined by the situation Crime linkage process determining, same person committed 2+ crimes
Utility of inferences Tunnel Vision Geographic Profile Relies on maps and mathematics Railway Killer: geographic profiling revealed killings by railway tracks Anchor point: location from which offender leaves to launch attacks Buffer zone: around a criminal’s home area, less likely to commit crimes Temporal Sequencing: distance decay is offset
Behavioral Investigative Advice BIA: Probative evidence Deborah Davis & William Follette Man on trial for wife’s murder - snowboarding accident Showed how inferences dubious profile make it into the courtroom Equivocal death: unsure why someone died
NASH system: Death classification, death into 4 categories Natural Accidental Suicide Homicide
Psychological Autopsy: effort to dissect/ examine psychological state of a person prior to death
Plea Bargaining, Jury Selection, and Trial Procedure Brian Banks falsely convicted on plea bargaining Plea Bargaining: majority of criminal cases 90% of felony cases Unregulated
Arraignment: defendant charged with crime will typically appear No contest (nolo contendere) allows defendant to avoid Alford Plea Standings Guilty pleas are voluntary confessions given by guilty defendants Mental impairment Tender-of-plea form Defendant enters plea voluntarily, no threat/ promise Defendant understands changes Defendant understands consequences of plea being entered
Judicial plea colloquy Prosecutor Picks charge/ charges Plea bargain pick if/ who bargains what First access to reports/ interviews/ test reports Withhold exculpatory information from defense attorneys
Plea Bargains Shorter sentences, limited offers Juveniles are 2 times more likely to take plea bargain when innocent
6th amendment 7th amendment Jury Selection & Service Act of 1968 (Taylor v. Louisiana) 1975 Assemble juries that constitute “fair cross-section of community” 12 people randomly selected Process of deselection Pool: geographic area, English, 18+, mentally competent, no felons Primary source: identified from registration lists Underrepresented: poor people, African Americans, Hispanics, people who move frequently, individuals who recently turned 18
Venire: group of prospective jurors that show up One day or One Trial Voir Dire “To see and tell” Pretrial interview, held in open court Lawyers get chance to “challenge” potential jurors Used to educate churros about issues relevant to upcoming trial
Challenge for Cause: remove would-be-juror because of bias Peremptory challenge: powerful type of challenge
Cognizable group, empanel unbiased, rep jury, law Timothy Foster Race-neutral challenges of how race is used for exclusion Found violation of constitution Cannot discriminate based on being fat, short, Irish American, Italian American
Shadow Jury Trial Consultants Scientific Jury Selection: Multiple Regression Females are slightly more likely to treat rapists/ child molesters harshly Males more likely to be elected as foreperson (based on job title/ status in society) 3 jury verdict traits Locus of control Revised Legal Attitudes Questionnaire Juror Bias Scale (JBS) Pretrial Juror Attitude Questionnaire Civil Trials Plaintiff sues a defendant for an alleged harm Found liable → pays monetary damages Civil Trial Bias scale: 16 items
Similarity - leniency Hypothesis Diverse juries deliberate longer, make less inaccurate statements, depends on how “similar” people are
2013 George Zimmerman Opening Statement Burden of proof Claiming defendant broke the law Defendant must be judged guilty beyond a reasonable doubt Civil cases: proof held liable preponderance of the evidence
Direct examination lawyer questions witness Cross-examination Redirect Examination: attorney witness requestions Recross examination: last opportunity for questioning the witness Closing argument: summation prosecutor/ plaintiffs lawyer gets first and last say
Judges and Juries as Decision Makers Story model: Juror decision making, jurors create stories to make sense of evidence presented at trial Liberation hypothesis: jury verdicts are determined by the strength of the evidence (compelling) Defendant’s race interacts with jurors race in racially charged trials When stereotypes are confirmed it draws from attention Damage awards tends to be lower for individuals and higher for companies Inadmissible evidence: Sustain the objection Overrule the objection Reactance Theory: Backfire effect: Impeachment evidence: damages the credibility of witness statements Prior dishonest conduct for the purpose of establishing honesty of the defendant’s current testimony Expert witnesses → specialized knowledge/ experience Jurors Passive spectators store information, make decisions Strong jurors - disproportionate influence on the process
Leniency Bias Verdict driven style: Evidence-driven style Open Conflict Informational influence Normative Influence Reconciliation Hung juries Those that cannot reach a unanimous verdict 12 person jury from, 6 person is constitutional but no smaller
Unanimous test Majority-rule juries Dynamite charge- Allen Charge/Shotgun Instruction Jury Nullification Lack of comprehension confuses the jury Pre-Instructions: what jury is told before, discuss evidence
|
Knowt
Note
Studied by 32 people
