Criminal Law Bulletin
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN Volume 54, Number 1 SOMNILOQUY AS EVIDENCE:THE RECURRING APPEARANCE OF OUTDATED ‘‘SLEEP TALK’’ EXPERTISE David S. Caudill and Mark R. Pressman SAFETY FROM FALSE CONFESSIONS Boaz Sangero CYBERSEX TRAFFICKING:TOWARD A MORE EFFECTIVE PROSECUTORIAL RESPONSE Joshua T. Carback ARRESTED FOR A BELCH IN GYM CLASS: A.M. V.HOLMES,EXCESSIVE FORCE ON SCHOOL- CHILDREN, AND QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Ramón A. Soto EVIDENCE COMMENTARY INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS AS SUBSTANTIVE EVIDENCE:ACRITICAL REVIEW AND PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO FEDERAL RULE OF EVIDENCE 801(D)(1)(A); LACK OF RECO- LLECTION’S IMPACT UPON SUBSTANTIVE ADMISSIBILITY Michael H. Graham FORENSICS COMMENTARY MASSIVELY PARALLEL SEQUENCING (MPS): THE NEXT STEP IN THE EVOLUTION OF DNA IDENTIFICATIONS Brittany Radke and Edward J. Imwinkelried FROM THE LEGAL LITERATURE Claire Angelique R. I. Nolasco © 2018 Thomson Reuters This publication was created to provide you with accurate and authoritative information concerning the subject matter covered; however, this publication was not necessarily prepared by persons licensed to practice law in a particular jurisdiction. The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal or other professional advice and this publication is not a substitute for the advice of an attorney. If you require legal or other expert advice, you should seek the services of a competent attorney or other professional. Safety from False Confessions Boaz Sangero* Abstract In certain fields, the meaning of a “safety-critical system” is well understood, and resources are, therefore, invested in modern safety methods, which significantly reduces the rate of accidents. For example, the aviation field abandoned the obsolete “Fly-Fix-Fly” ap- proach and developed more advanced safety methods that gener- ally follow an “Identify-Analyze-Control” model and are aimed at “First-Time-Safe.” Under the latter approach, there is systematic identification of future hazards, analysis of the probability of their oc- currence, and a complete neutralization of the risk or at least its reduction to an acceptable level. As explained in the article, a false conviction is no less a system error and accident than a combat- plane crash. Yet in criminal law, a “Hidden Accidents Principle” governs and the overwhelming majority of false convictions are never detected. Consequently, no thought has ever been given to safety in the system. Empiric studies based on the Innocence Project’s findings point to a very high false-conviction rate: at least 5% for the most serious crimes. About one-quarter of those convic- tions had been determined to be based on a false confession. Current confession law—in particular, the Miranda rules—only ad- dresses the possibility of an involuntary confession. It does not seri- ously deal with the existing possibility of false confessions (which may be voluntary). This article proposes a theory and some initial tools for incorporating modern safety into the criminal justice system. Specifically, I demonstrate how the innovative “System-Theoretic Ac- cident Model and Processes” (STAMP) safety model can be applied in the criminal justice system, by developing constraints, controls, and barriers against the existing hazards in the context of convic- tions grounded on the defendant’s confession during police interrogation. *Professor of Law, Founder of Criminal Law & Criminology Department, Col- lege of Law & Business, Ramat-Gan, Israel; and School of Law, Sapir College, Israel. I thank Prof. Rinat Kitai-Sangero for her tremendous help in all the stages of the writing. I also thank Dr. Daniel Hartmann, Prof. Nancy Leveson and Dana Meshulam-Rothmann for their helpful comments on an earlier draft. Finally, I also thank Adv. James Doyle for his helpful comments on an advanced draft. © 2018 Thomson Reuters E Criminal Law Bulletin E Vol. 54 No. 1 25 CRIMINAL LAW BULLETIN Introduction The meaning of a “safety-critical system” is well understood in some fields, therefore, more resources are invested in modern safety methods, which significantly reduces the rate of accidents. For example, in the field of pharmaceuticals and drugs, where in the first half of the twentieth-century, the need for safety was already acknowledged and internalized, and the necessary powers and authorities were granted to the FDA to ensure this. This was also the case in the aviation field, which abandoned the obsolete “Fly-Fix- Fly” approach in the mid-20th Century and developed more advanced safety methods that generally follow an “Identify-Analyze- Control” model and are aimed at “First-Time-Safe.” Under the latter approach, there is systematic identification of future hazards, analysis of the probability of their occurrence, and a complete neutralization of the risk or at least its reduction to an acceptable level. Modern safety approaches such as these were implemented in other fields as well, such as transportation and engineering, and later, in labor and medicine. These safety systems are constructed on, among other things: safety education and training, a culture of safety, a duty to report not only accidents but also incidents (near- accidents), professional risk assessment, a process of perpetual improvement, and the understanding that safety in each component of a system alone in detachment from the entire system is not suf- ficient for achieving system safety. In the criminal justice system, accidents happen too of course: false convictions. For this reason, this system must also be classi- fied as needing a safety-critical system.1 As systems of this type entail matters of life and death, any system error is likely to cause severe harm to both individuals and society at large. A false convic- tion is no less a system error and accident than a plane crash, not only from a metaphorical perspective but also in the very realistic terms of economic cost.2 Yet in criminal law, a Hidden Accidents 1 In a coauthored Article with Dr. Mordechai Halpert, we have suggested ap- plying the term “safety-critical system” to the criminal justice system: Mordechai Halpert & Boaz Sangero, From a Plane Crash to the Conviction of an Innocent Person: Why Forensic Science Evidence Should Be Inadmissible unless It Has Been Developed as a Safety-Critical System, 32 HAMLINE L. REV. 65, 70 (2009). 2 Boaz Sangero & Mordechai Halpert, A Safety Doctrine for the Criminal Justice System,MICH.ST. L. REV. 1293, 1304–05 (2011). Incorporating into the criminal justice system a modern safety theory that is commonly accepted in other areas, such as space, aviation, engineering, and transportation, is an idea that was developed jointly by myself and Dr. Mordechai Halpert and presented in a number of coauthored Articles, particularly A Safety Doctrine for the Criminal Justice System. My current Article is intended to expand on the preliminary proposition and engage in the application of the modern safety theory in the criminal justice system, specifi- cally regarding false confessions. 26 © 2018 Thomson Reuters E Criminal Law Bulletin E Vol. 54 No. 1 SAFETY FROM FALSE CONFESSIONS Principle governs.3 Thus, the overwhelming majority of false convic- tions are never detected, which led to the erroneous traditional and conservative assumption that they occur at an almost negligible rate and that the criminal justice system is almost perfect. Consequently, no thought has ever been given to safety, and the criminal justice system, from a safety perspective, lags far behind other areas. The patently flawed assumption of a low false-conviction rate has been challenged in recent decades. This has been primarily a result of the work of the Innocence Project, in which hundreds of cases of false convictions have been exposed through genetic testing, and empiric studies based on the Project’s findings, which point to a very high false-conviction rate: at least 5% for the most serious crimes and an apparently even higher rate for less serious crimes.4 About one-quarter of those convictions had been based on a (presumably false) confession.5 In the past, courts tended to view a defendant’s confession, even when extracted by police interrogators, as very strong evidence that is (and should be) sufficient to attain a conviction, and the confes- sion has been crowned the “queen of evidence.”6 Yet many studies have pointed to the phenomenon of false confessions and its vari- ous causes. Other studies have revealed the significant extent to which wrongful convictions based on false confessions occur. American law, it will be shown, does not make a serious attempt at contending with the risk of a false confession that is voluntarily given. Elsewhere, I have recommended instituting a statutory strong corroboration requirement for convicting based on a confession.7 This mandatory condition would require strong, autonomous cor- roboration of the allegation that the defendant is the perpetrator of the crime. Yet even this stronger requirement would not always suf- fice to prevent a false conviction, due to the light evidentiary weight that should be accorded to a confession. In a world in which the law- enforcement system could distinguish between what is true and what is false, it can be assumed that false confessions would be filtered out. Yet contrary to what is commonly believed, research 3 Sangero & Halpert, supra note 2, at 1314–16. 4 Michael Risinger, Innocents Convicted: An Empirically Justified Factual Wrongful Conviction Rate, 97 J. CRIM. L. & CRIMINOLOGY 761 (2007). 5 BARRY SCHECK,PETER NEUFELD &JIM DWYER,ACTUAL INNOCENCE:FIVE DAYS TO EXECUTION AND OTHER DISPATCHES FROM THE WRONGLY CONVICTED (2000); Keith A. Findley, Learning from Our Mistakes: A Criminal Justice Commission to Study Wrongful Convictions, 38 CAL. W. L. REV. 333 (2002); And for a study analyzing the first two hundred acquittals of the Innocence Project, see Brandon L. Garrett, Judging Innocence, 108 COLUM. L. REV. 55, 76 (2008). 6 Boaz Sangero, Miranda Is Not Enough: A New Justification for Demanding “Strong Corroboration” to a Confession, 28 CARDOZO L.