Expert Testimony

This document discusses false confessions, Behavioral Analysis Interview, evaluation of personal and situational risk factors, Mr. Big Sting, and early judicial decisions on eyewitness memory. It also includes a case study and explains how an expert witness can deal with eyewitness accuracy.

Running Head: EXPERT TESTIMONY 1
Expert testimony
Name
Institution
Professor
Course
Date

EXPERT TESTIMONY 2
1) Name and briefly explain the four types of false confessions as defined in the textbook. (4
Marks)
i. Instrumental-Coerced false confessions
This type of false confession occurs after the long and intense interrogations resulting to
the suspects confess to the accused crime that they never committed (Costanzo & Leo, 2006).
The suspect decides to end the interrogation by just accepting they committed the crime even if
not true.
ii. Instrumental-Voluntary false confession
This is the type of confession in which the suspects admit themselves to the accused
crime to achieve a certain goal. For example, one member of the terrorists group can admit to the
crime he did not commit only to protect another higher ranked member of the terrorists
organization from being interrogated and accused (Costanzo & Leo, 2006). In other incidents,
parents can admit having been committed the crime only to protect their child or children from
convicted of the crime issue.
iii. Authentic-Coerced false confession
This type of false confession occurs as a result of the intense and long interrogation that
suspects are convinced especially temporary that they might have committed the crime
(Costanzo & Leo, 2006). The suspect thinks he may have committed the crime without their
knowledge and admits temporary to the crime accused.
iv. Authentic-Voluntary false confession
This type of false confession occurs when the accused person may or may not have
committed the unserious type of crime. The person decides to admit to the crime because it has

EXPERT TESTIMONY 3
no pressure or it is not a serious crime from the interrogation (Costanzo & Leo, 2006). In most
cases, these types of crimes do not end up to jail or fines but they are just ignored or forgiven.
2) What is the Behavioral Analysis Interview (BAI), and how has it been connected to false
confessions? (4 Marks).
This is the type of questioning method developed to help the investigators differentiate
between the guilty and the innocent. It is connected to false confession in that it helps in
determining the people deceived to admit to crime in the interview (Pezdek, 2006). It involves
the tactics and strategies that reveal if the person interrogated is telling lies or truth. The outcome
of this method depends on the skills of the officer interrogating and intensiveness of the
interview.
3) Case study…..
How would you evaluate the personal risk factors, situational risk factors, and reliability of
this confession? How might you present your findings to a jury? (10 Marks).
As an expert, I would evaluate the personal risk factors by determining how the suspect
resisted the influence after he was confronted by the police officers. The suspect confessed to the
crime out of pressure he received from the police. The only option the suspect left with was just
admitting to the crime after pressing confrontation from the police. On the other hand, the
evaluation of the situational risks will be evaluated through I identification of the two different
structural aspects of the police interrogation. This will involve determining the guilty-
presumptive social interaction between the police and the suspect. This will bring a strong
foundation for the operation of the cognitive confirmation biases. The reliability of the

EXPERT TESTIMONY 4
confession will be evaluated based on how the police interrogated the suspect. By analyzing the
way the police interrogated the suspect, it is obvious that the suspect confessed to the crime by
false. The police imposed much pressure on the suspect and the only option the suspect left with
was just to admit to the crime. I would present my findings to the jury by highlighting the
process used by the police in interrogating the suspect. I will put it clear that the admission of
the suspect to the crime was just out of the pressure from the police and they just assumed that he
was involved in the crime without strong bases. I would request the Jury to have a fresh
interrogation of the suspect with more expert interrogators for the truthful information and fair
trial.
3) In this week’s interview Dr. Moore discusses the Mr. Big Sting. Describe in your own
words how this investigative procedure works and why it may be the subject of expert
witness testimony. (6 Marks).
The investigation procedure will work by having the robust post-trial frameworks for the
accessing of the miscarriage of the criminal. Having a reliability filter or not, there will be
chances of false confession. To avoid the miscarriage of justice, it would be important to admit
that in the trial can never be perfect and the only thing to be done is to try the best for justice. In
this case, there will be a need for jury directions. I think this will be subject to the expert witness
testimony because this case is counter-intuitive where the jury will not confess falsely but
evaluate according to the truth and justice. In this case, there is a need for more experienced and
trained personnel to handle this case thus expert witness testimony needed.
5) In your own words, describe why early judicial decisions (i.e. Criglow v. State, People v.
Collier) barred expert testimony on eyewitness memory (2 Marks).

EXPERT TESTIMONY 5
I think early judicial decisions barred the expert testimony on eyewitness memory
because its evidence exceeds its probative value. In this case, expert testimony on eyewitness
memory would not be able to predict if the evidence was unfair or not. It will not be possible to
determine any breach of the chief justice practice on police questioning.
8) A hypothetical psychological expert witness has identified a number of variables that
may negatively affect the accuracy of identification, however the eyewitness is extremely
confident that they are correct. How can the expert deal with this? (6 Marks).
The expert can deal with this by examining each of the presented concerns in turn. The
expert should have it in mind that recognizing the concerns may overlap. The expert would do it
from the first principle that prevents anyone from being tied to any legal rules and policies of the
jurisdiction. By doing so, the expert will be raising the arguments for the accused party. This will
be a better way of doing it rather than just coming up with a definitive conclusion.

EXPERT TESTIMONY 6
References
Costanzo, M., & Leo, R. A. (2006). Research and expert testimony on interrogations and
confessions. Expert psychological testimony for the courts, 69-98.
Pezdek, K. (2006). Expert Testimony on Eyewitness Memory and Identification, Expert
psychological testimony for the courts, 99-118