Why did the killer of Jacob Wetterling confess?

I’ve worked for almost forty years as both a prosecutor and a criminal defense lawyer.  I’ve prosecuted and defended similar cases.  Here’s what I’ve learned over the years.

1.  Of course, the obvious reason the killer of Jacob Wetterling confessed is because of the plea deal he received from prosecutors.  Heinrich faced several counts of child porn charges in federal court but was not charged with murder of Jacob Wetterling.  Prosecutors and defense lawyers agreed that if Heinrich plead guilty to the child porn case and confessed to murdering Jacob Wetterling, he would receive a sentence of 20 years and not be charged with murder.  Potentially, if he had been charged and convicted of the sexual assault of the boy and the murder, Heinrich could have faced more than 20 years in prison.  Unfortunately for prosecutors, they didn’t have any evidence to charge him with murder.  They wanted an answer that has haunted thousands of people around the country for 27 years
2. In my experience, there is often more to a confession than simply less prison time—although that is certainly a strong motivation.  I think there’s more to this case that caused the killer of Jacob Wetterling to confess.  After all, he would never have been charged with murder because of the lack of evidence.  Even if convicted of the child porn case, he probably would’ve served less time in federal prison.  So, why did he confess?
3. One reason I’ve seen quite often is an appeal to the killer based on moral standards.  The investigators will often say things like: “You know you’re guilty.  Why don’t you get right with God and confess?”  Guilt goes a long way.  For those defendants who believe in God, the appeal can work and make them confess even when it seems in their best interest—in this world—to keep quiet.
4. Another tactic I’ve seen is for the investigator to appeal to family, especially the defendant’s mother.  Something like:  “What would your mother say if she knew you murdered someone?  Wouldn’t you want to come straight for her sake and get this off your chest?”  This approach works with certain defendants.
5. Sometimes, it’s a reminder of how the victims and the families are suffering that will move a defendant to confess to a murder.

I don’t know exactly what motivated the killer of Jacob Wetterling to confess, but I would guess it involved not only the plea deal on prison time and potential charges, but also one of the other appeals to a higher moral obligation that even the most hardened criminals often respond to.

The post Why did the Killer of Jacob Wetterling Confess? appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.

1.  The criminal justice system assumes that an unwavering eyewitness who identifies the defendant at trial, is enough solid proof for a finding of guilt.  But new scientific studies have clearly shown that eyewitnesses choose an innocent person about 1/3 of the time!  The witness can be affected by biases, failed memory, and the lack of time to actually see the suspect.

2.  The criminal justice system relies on a signed confession by a suspect as clear proof of guilt.  After all, we think, why would an innocent person sign a confession about their guilt?  But again, scientific studies have shown that the “tricks” the interrogators use can affect the suspect’s actions.  Often, police will exaggerate the strength of their case and offer to let the suspect go—if only they would just sign this piece of paper indicating their involvement in the crime.  Their guilt, that is.

3.  Even some scientific testing can be flawed.  We’ve come to assume that DNA analysis is fool-proof and will provide the criminal justice system with the truth.  But even here in my area, there can be problems.  For instance, a police forensics lab in St. Paul was recently closed because of the sloppy manner in which they did their testing.  All the cases they analyzed had to be re-opened and looked at.  The testing may be okay, but the humans running the tests are only that—humans subject to errors.

So, what should we do to reform the criminal justice system?

Prof. Benforado suggests that we use the research that we have now.

1.  Witnesses should not be coached or even talked to by the police actually investigating the crime.  Use a neutral party to present line-ups to witnesses.  Research also shows that a better identification can be made by showing witnesses suspects’ photos one at a time rather than all at once.

2.  To reform the criminal justice system of interrogations, police should use a less confrontational approach and rely, instead, on an information gathering style.  The process should be recorded by cameras set at “third party” positions.  (Many interrogations place the camera behind the cop or behind the suspect—both lead to biased impressions among juries)

3.  Lab technicians should not be informed that samples are from the suspect.  Research has shown that the human bias to help law enforcement can affect the lab test results.

Will this cure all our problems?  Of course not, but I like the idea of using the evidence-based research to change and reform our criminal justice system.  Now the job of doing it starts . . .

Do you have any suggestions?

The post Science to Reform the Criminal Justice System appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.

Once he was “lawyered up,” he refused to speak.

The assumption was that if the authorities had free access to him, they could have worked him over until he confessed–to the plot and future threats. Underneath the “experts” urgings , were hints of torture techniques that have been used before.

Do these techniques work?

I’m certainly no expert myself on the issue but listen to a true story close to home of someone who was an expert at getting confessions.

Detective Dick O’Brien worked for decades for the Minneapolis Police Department. As a criminal defense lawyer, I knew Dick and like many others, always called him Father O’Brien when we saw him around headquarters or the jail.

Unfortunately, Dick died quite young as a result of years of chain smoking but I got to know him after he retired from the police department and took a job as an investigator in the Public Defenders office. He helped me with many cases.

A small man, he was quiet and thin. Dark curly hair and a dark complexion always seemed obscured by cigarette smoke ringing his head. I suspect that his eyes and ears were never blocked as he seemed to catch everything that went on around him.

Dick was an ex-marine and had been a tough street cop before rising to detective level.

We all called him Father O’Brien because he got more confessions out of murderers, rapists, robbers, and drug dealers than any other ten cops put together. Whenever I’d ask him how he did it so well, in his shy way he’d only allow a thin smile to reveal his secrets.

When we started working together, he’d often interview clients with me. These were the same types of people he’d interrogated just a few years earlier. I had the opportunity to see him work his magic.

I noticed several things he did:

–He knew the mindset of criminals–what they wanted, were afraid of, what motivated them

–He could pick up on the nuances and inflection in their words and body language that gave him information although he never talked like them–no street slang.

–He never pretended to be their friend.

–He always had control and kept the authority but never threatened them.

–Although he talked about “getting them a break,” he appealed to higher motivation inside of them–urging them to do what they knew was right–and confess.

He even had techniques that worked on different people. For instance, if he was questioning a black defendant, he’d always ask him “what would your Mama want you to do if she knew you were here?” With the white guys, he asked what their fathers would do if they found out. “He’d kick my ass,” was the usual response and they all confessed.

International terrorsts may be completely different that local murderers and robbers but the example Father O’Brien left, leads me to think some of his techniques would be useful today.

What do you think?

Visit my website at www.colintnelson.com

The post Will Torture Get Confessions? appeared first on Colin T. Nelson.