Exploring the Role of Police Misconduct Within Canadian Wrongful Conviction Cases
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Wilfrid Laurier University Scholars Commons @ Laurier Theses and Dissertations (Comprehensive) 2016 Investigative Inadequacies or Investigative Corruption? Exploring the Role of Police Misconduct within Canadian Wrongful Conviction Cases Michelle L. Lovegrove Wilfrid Laurier University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.wlu.ca/etd Part of the Criminology and Criminal Justice Commons, Law and Society Commons, Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons, and the Other Legal Studies Commons Recommended Citation Lovegrove, Michelle L., "Investigative Inadequacies or Investigative Corruption? Exploring the Role of Police Misconduct within Canadian Wrongful Conviction Cases" (2016). Theses and Dissertations (Comprehensive). 1881. https://scholars.wlu.ca/etd/1881 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations (Comprehensive) by an authorized administrator of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INVESTIGATIVE INADEQUACIES OR INVESTIGATIVE CORRUPTION? EXPLORING THE ROLE OF POLICE MISCONDUCT WITHIN CANADIAN WRONGFUL CONVICTION CASES. By Michelle Lovegrove B.A (Honours), Wilfrid Laurier University, 2014 THESIS Submitted to the Department of Criminology In partial fulfillment of the requirements for Master of Arts in Criminology Wilfrid Laurier University © Michelle Lovegrove 2016 Abstract The phenomenon of wrongful convictions has begun to attract the attention of the public and scholars alike within the past few decades. However, despite this recent fixation the issue of wrongful convictions is not new, as research on the subject dates back to 1932 with the work of Edwin Borchard. Most of the research on the subject of wrongful convictions has focused largely on identifying the factors that contribute to these injustices. For the most part academics are in agreement when it comes to the causes of wrongful convictions, which include, eyewitness misidentification, false confessions, police & prosecutor misconduct, use of jailhouse informants, errors in forensic science and ineffective assistance of council (Grounds, 2005). While misconduct resulting from investigative error has been cited as a cause of wrongful convictions, the research is predominately concerned with examining eyewitness misidentification, which has been cited as the leading cause of these errors (Gould & Leo, 2010). However, this study highlights the importance of examining the role of police and prosecutors in the establishment of a wrongful conviction. It is quite clear that police officers play a pivotal role within any investigation, as they are first to arrive at the scene, they are also responsible for the collection of evidence, interviewing all parties involved, identifying suspects, as well as possible motives. This research intends to examine the issue of police misconduct, through a socio-legal analysis of six Canadian public inquiries into wrongful convictions. Filling a void within wrongful conviction research through the examination of two neglected areas, police misconduct and the experiences of the wrongly convicted from a Canadian perspective. ii Acknowledgments First and Foremost, I would like to thank my Supervisor Dr. Ken Dowler for your assistance in developing an interesting and challenging topic. This project would have not been possible without your ideas and knowledge. I would also like to thank my committee members Dr. Thomas Fleming, Dr. Daniel Antonowicz, as well as my external examiner Dr. Ron Stansfield, as without your dedication and support this project would have not been possible. You have each provided me with unique insights into the study of wrongful convictions, which I'm grateful for. It was truly a pleasure to get the opportunity to work with each of you. Thank you my family and friends, as I’m so grateful to have such an amazing support system. To my Parents: You have both supported me since the beginning always encouraging me to pursue my dreams, and for this I'm forever thankful for. Thank you both for all of your love and support throughout this journey, I could not have done it without you. I would also like to thank my cohort, it was a pleasure working with and getting to know you all over the past two years. Completing this program with all of you has been an experience I will not forget! Thank you for the late night study sessions, laughs and encouragement I wish you all the best of luck in the future. A special thank-you to the staff and faculty, of the Criminology department at Wilfrid Laurier University. Thank you for providing me with this opportunity by accepting me into the program, and thank you to all the professors who have helped me along the way. I would especially like to thank to Marg Harris, for all that you have done and all that you continue to do for your students, you truly go above and beyond. Thank you for all your kind words and cheering me on over these past two years. And Lastly, I would like to thank my partner Will, for your endless patience and for sticking by my side, and most importantly for believing I could do this. iii Table of Contents ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................... II ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................................. III CHAPTER ONE: AN INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS .............................................................................................................................. 6 ACTUAL VS. LEGAL INNOCENCE: ................................................................................................. 7 THE SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM ..................................................................................................... 11 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY ..................................................................................................... 15 THE HARMS OF BEING WRONGLY CONVICTED .......................................................................... 16 RESEARCH FOCUS: ..................................................................................................................... 19 CHAPTER TWO : BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY ........................................................... 21 CURRENT RESEARCH: ................................................................................................................. 23 THE ROLE OF THE POLICE IN WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS: ......................................................... 27 RESEARCH FOCUS: ..................................................................................................................... 50 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY .................................................................................. 51 RESEARCH QUESTIONS: .............................................................................................................. 51 SOCIO-LEGAL ANALYSIS: ........................................................................................................... 52 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 54 INITIAL CODING .......................................................................................................................... 55 INCIDENT-BY-INCIDENT CODING ............................................................................................... 56 FOCUSED CODING ....................................................................................................................... 56 MEMO-WRITING: ........................................................................................................................ 57 A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE PUBLIC INQUIRIES EXAMINED ....................................................... 58 CONCLUSION: ............................................................................................................................. 66 CHAPTER FOUR- RESULTS –INVESTIGATION INADEQUACIES ................................ 67 INADEQUATE DOCUMENTATION ................................................................................................ 67 INADEQUATE TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE ................................................................................ 72 FAILURE TO DISCLOSE ................................................................................................................ 75 FAILURE TO THOROUGHLY EXAMINE EVIDENCE ....................................................................... 78 PREMATURE FOCUS ON A SUSPECT: ........................................................................................... 81 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................. 85 CHAPTER FIVE: RESULTS - INVESTIGATION CORRUPTION ..................................... 86 MISHANDLED OR CONTAMINATED EVIDENCE ........................................................................... 86 OVERRELIANCE ON JUNK SCIENCE ............................................................................................ 89 UNETHICAL INTERVIEW & INTERROGATION PRACTICES ........................................................... 93 INFLUENCING OR STRENGTHENING WITNESS TESTIMONIES ..................................................... 97 USE OF UNSAVORY CHARACTERS ...........................................................................................