Mandatory Videotaping of Interrogations Is the Solution to Illinois' Problem of False Confessions Steven A
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Loyola University Chicago Law Journal Volume 32 Article 3 Issue 2 Winter 2001 2001 Let the Cameras Roll: Mandatory Videotaping of Interrogations Is the Solution to Illinois' Problem of False Confessions Steven A. Drizin Northwestern University School of Law Beth A. Colgan Follow this and additional works at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj Part of the Criminal Law Commons Recommended Citation Steven A. Drizin, & Beth A. Colgan, Let the Cameras Roll: Mandatory Videotaping of Interrogations Is the Solution to Illinois' Problem of False Confessions, 32 Loy. U. Chi. L. J. 337 (2001). Available at: http://lawecommons.luc.edu/luclj/vol32/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by LAW eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola University Chicago Law Journal by an authorized administrator of LAW eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Let the Cameras Roll: Mandatory Videotaping of Interrogations Is the Solution to Illinois' Problem of False Confessions Steven A. Drizin & Beth A. Colgan* I. INTRO DUCTION ............................................................................ 339 II. THE NEED FOR VIDEOTAPING OF INTERROGATIONS IN ILLINOIS ... 341 A. The Confession Problem in Illinois...................................... 345 1. T he C ases ....................................................................... 345 a. Cases of Innocence ................................................... 349 i. Children ..................................................... 349 ii. A dults ......................................................... 356 b. Problematic Interrogations ....................................... 362 i. Children ..................................................... 363 ii. A dults ......................................................... 369 iii. Area Two Investigations............................. 374 B. Response to the Confession Problem in Illinois ................... 378 1. Response of the Public Generally ................ 378 2. Response of Governor George Ryan .............................. 382 3. Response of the Chicago Police Department and the Cook County State's Attorney ............................................. 383 III. ILLINOIS HOUSE BILL 4697 .......................................................... 385 A. Law Enforcement Objections to H.B. 4697 .......................... 389 1. Interrogations v. Confessions ......................................... 390 * Steven A. Drizin is a supervising attorney at Northwestern University School of Law Children and Family Justice Center. Beth A. Colgan, a graduate of Northwestern School of Law (2000), is an attorney in Seattle, Washington. The authors would like to give special thanks to Kate Shank, whose ongoing efforts made this article possible. They would also like to thank Mary Powers, Greg O'Reilly, John Rekowski, Cathryn Stewart and Kate Walz for their tireless advocacy for mandatory videotaping of interrogations; and Professors Richard Leo and Welsh White for their insightful comments during the development of this article. Further thanks are extended to Dolores Angeles, Thomas Geraghty, Sarah Mervine and Heidi Steiner for their support. 338 Loyola University Chicago Law Journal [Vol. 32 a. Interference with Police Work .................................. 391 i. F easibility................................................... 39 1 ii. Impairing Interrogations............................ 392 b. Creation of an Onerous Burden on the Judicial Process ...........................................................................397 c. Opponents "Cures" .................................................. 403 2. Issues Regarding the Scope of the Interrogation and Logistics of Videotaping ..................................................... 404 3. Cost of Implementing the Bill ........................................ 407 B. The Compromise Bill ........................................................... 412 C. The Final Campaign Against Videotaping........................... 417 IV . C ONCLUSION ............................................................................... 4 19 2001] Let the Cameras Roll I. INTRODUCTION The Illinois State Legislature recently embarked on an ambitious enterprise by attempting to mandate the videotaping of police interrogations. The push for this legislation arose from a spate of false confession cases and questionable interrogations that have plagued Illinois law enforcement and undermined the general public's faith in the criminal justice system. This Article examines the history of problematic interrogations in Illinois, in part by detailing a number of these cases to show the importance of requiring the electronic recording of interrogations. This Article then follows the path of the proposed videotaping legislation through its many revisions to its ultimate demise. It is our hope that this case study of Illinois' recent experience can better prepare other proponents of videotaping interrogations for their own struggles to improve their state criminal justice systems. The videotaping of interrogations is not a novel concept. Three states-Alaska, Minnesota, and Texas-currently require recording of interrogations in some form.' Though not required to do so, a growing number of law enforcement authorities have started experimenting with videotaping interrogations and/or confessions. Indeed, a 1993 U.S. Justice Department report found that at least one-third of the nation's largest police departments were videotaping some interrogations and confessions. 2 This study concluded that videotaping interrogations gave judges a greater ability to assess the voluntariness of confessions, 3 led to an increase in convictions and plea bargains, 4 and led to fewer charges of police misconduct. 5 The study also found that, after some initial resistance, police departments and prosecutors came to embrace 1. The Supreme Court of Alaska ruled in 1985 that the state constitution's due process clause required that police electronically record suspect interrogations when the suspect is taken into a place of detention and recording is feasible. Stephen v. State, 711 P.2d 1156, 1158 (Alaska 1985). In 1994, Minnesota's Supreme Court followed Alaska's lead, ruling that "all custodial interrogation ... and all questioning shall be recorded where feasible and must be recorded when questioning occurs at a place of detention." State v. Scales, 518 N.W.2d 587, 588 (Minn. 1994). In Texas, the legislature enacted a law in 1979 that bars admission of oral confessions unless they are electronically recorded. TEx. CRIM. P. CODE ANN. § 38.22(3) (West 2000). 2. William A. Geller, Videotaping Interrogations and Confessions, in NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF JUSTICE, U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE, RESEARCH IN BRIEF (Mar. 1993); see also Cathy Young, Miranda Morass, REASON, Apr. 1, 2000, available at http://www.reason.com/0004/fe.cy. miranda.html (stating that at least 2,400 police departments audio- or videotape confessions and interrogations). 3. Geller, supra note 2, at 9. 4. See infra notes 332-48, 367-72 and accompanying text (arguing that video recording is good public policy towards stopping police brutality and improving public interrogations). 5. Geller, supra note 2, at 6. 340 Loyola University Chicago Law Journal [Vol. 32 videotaping. 6 Given these findings, it seems that a law mandating the videotaping of interrogations would be supported by law enforcement. Ironically, however, the introduction of a videotaping bill in Illinois caused police and prosecutors to join together in an effort to crush the legislation. Part II of this Article examines the checkered history of law 7 enforcement in Illinois that led to the call to videotape interrogations. This Part details the confession problem in Illinois, highlighting many examples of proven false confessions, probable false confessions, and problematic interrogations that have been brought to the public's attention. 8 Part II will also discuss responses to the confession problem by the general public, Governor George Ryan, the Chicago Police Department and Cook County State's Attorney's Office. 9 Part III of this Article analyzes the legislation introduced in Illinois regarding videotaping of interrogations by enumerating the positions of proponents and opponents to the legislation, describing the resulting compromised version of the legislation, and analyzing the ultimate collapse of the bill.' ° Even though this recent effort at reform was defeated, this Article concludes that the time has come for Illinois law enforcement to videotape interrogations. The many false confession and problematic interrogation cases in Illinois involving both children and adults, I I discovered in research and discussed herein, support this conclusion. Studying these cases highlights fundamental flaws in the criminal justice system. Protecting against false confessions, while a useful lens for study, is not the only basis for this Article's conclusions. The primary reason for 6. Id. 7. See infra Part II (arguing that the pressure for videotaping was mounting as many innocent inmates were exonerated after being jailed for statements made to the police). 8. See infra Part II.A (examining the wide scope of the problem presented by policy misconduct extending past Chicago to the whole nation and not limited to police misconduct but also prosecutorial misconduct). 9. See infra Part II.B (discussing the response to the confession problem with an analysis of news reports and task force reports). 10.