Innocence Commission on Wrongful Conviction Issues

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Causes of Wrongful Conviction
Invalidated or Improper Forensics
False confessions or admissions
Conclusion
Reference List

Introduction

In the United States of America more than often are innocent people executed over crimes they never committed. In the sense that most people in the US may advocate for conviction of crimes committed against humanity the same way they should ensure that the convicted are the real criminals not innocent people who are accused mainly based on racial discrimination. With the advancement in forensic sciences of late we have had high cases of innocent people being exonerated due to lack of evidence as happen in the case of James Woodard in Dallas and the others who continue to be freed (Anderson& Dubin, 2008). Investigations should be thoroughly done by the District Agency to ensure people are served with right convictions even in the cases where conviction is through plea bargaining or admission to guilt (Roberts, 2003). The following are among the major causes of wrong conviction in the United States of America

Causes of Wrongful Conviction

Roberts (2003) when quoting Blackstone indicates that it is the legal principles that made the law a shield “the Rights of Englishmen.” These rights included due process, the attorney-client privilege, equality before the law, the right to confront adverse witnesses, and the prohibitions against crimes without intent, bills of attainder, self-incrimination, retroactive law, and attacks against a person through his property. Each of these principles has been breached (p. 569).

Instead of using these rights for protecting American citizens most of them are being used against them. Major causes of wrong convictions are through:

Eyewitness misidentification

Towards solving crime, eye witness evidence has always been preferred by the prosecutors to be among the best and the most reliable. Despite this, there has been problems relying on human memory which is liable to change and be influenced by other factors which include perception and candor. There has been many wrongful convictions of innocent citizens due to inaccurate eye witness evidence as seen in the case of Calvin Johnson and many others. Before the introduction of the DNA method of identifying the real criminal, eye witness evidence have been a major cause of wrongful conviction (Anon, 2005).

The problem with most of the wrong convictions which have been through eye witness evidence is that the victims confess to the suspect being the real criminal.

The prosecuting department always comes with photos of their main suspects ignoring the minor suspects who might be the real criminals. The witness can sometimes identify the suspect in some instances and fail to recognize him in other aspects.

This is a major credibility test to the authenticity and reliability of eye witness evidence. For example, as seen in the case of Calvin Johnson against Williamson; while Williamson identified him through the photos presented to her, she could not identify him in the live line-up.

There have been various wrongful convictions in the United States of America where innocent people have been accused and convicted of committing crimes. Though with advancements toward crime solving for example the introduction of DNA matching method that is subject to alterations, many innocent people have been exonerated, majority will continue to suffer in the prisons due to their incapability of accessing the human rights group which can forward their case to the authorities as we have experienced with the innocence project.

Invalidated or Improper Forensics

The use of forensic science has been a major success towards crime solving both in the United States of America and to the rest of the world where the technologies have been adopted. But while in the field of forensic sciences DNA has been a major success, the other forensic fields for example the hair, handwriting samples, and ballistic analysis have not had the same reputation and questions have been put on their accuracy and reliability in solving of crimes (Edwards & Gatsonis, 2009).

Inaccurate forensic tests have been evidenced in many cases in the United States of America for example in the case of Jennifer Thompson against Ronald Cotton; where the prosecutors using a piece of foam which was retrieved from the site of crime accused Cotton to have committed the rape crimes since it was confirmed that the material was similar to that of shoes worn by Cotton. The jury despite of all the inconsistencies that had been presented to it before the court reached to the guilty verdict and convicted an innocent man to 50 years in prison, only to be released later after DNA tests were done (Collins & Jarvis, 2009).

Other cases which have used false forensic methods thereby convicting innocent people of crimes not committed include the use of soil samples, clothing materials and other objects.

Questions have always been raised how extraordinary some of these samples are, for example, a clothing material was not made alone in the factory and thus similar quality materials can also be found.

Technologies have advanced but has and will always be prone to errors as we have seen in many cases of innocent people being convicted.

This brings out the fact that a national wide system should be established in order to ensure forensic tests are done accordingly to avoid miscarriages of justice.

False confessions or admissions

There has also been instances where innocent people have been convicted of crimes that they never committed through own admission or confessions of having committed the crime.

Despite confessions being one of the easiest ways of solving crimes there have been instances where people have made false confessions in order to save themselves from more problems. The three types of false confessions are:

Voluntary-false confessions
Coerced-compliant false confession
Coerced-internalized false confession

(Candel , Merckelbach, Loyen & Reyskens, 2005).

Although statistics may not be accurate, a study done by Kassin, Drizin, Grisso, Gudjonsson, leo, & Redlich (2010) indicates that “false confessions and admissions are present in 15 to 20 percent of all DNA exonerations” (p. 3).

The above percentage has been only from those who’ve sought for further assistance meaning that the percentage could even be higher. While these confessions lead to improper conviction to innocent people it is hard to detect false confessions as most people do not admit. Plea bargaining is also another major cause of false admissions due to the expectancy of a lenient sentence in case found guilty. Thus, to escape a harsh sentence the prosecutor and the accused attorney reaches to an agreement through plea bargaining.

False confessions and admissions vary according to the crime and suspected criminal characteristics. As indicated by Kassin, Drizin, Grisso, Gudjonsson, leo, & Redlich (2010);

Ninety-three percent of the false confessors were men. Overall, 81% of the confessions occurred in murder cases, followed by rape (8%) and arson 3%). The most common bases for exoneration were the real perpetrator was identified (74%) or that new scientific evidence was discovered (46%). With respect to personal vulnerabilities, the sample was younger than the total population of murderers and rapists (63% of false confessors were under the age of 25; 32% were under 18). In addition, 22% were mentally retarded, and 10% had a diagnosed mental illness. Surprisingly, multiple false confessions to the same crime were obtained in 30% of the cases, wherein one false confession was used to prompt others. In total, 81% of false confessors in this sample whose cases went to trial were wrongfully convicted. (p. 7-8)

Conclusion

The study has concluded that although the United States of America has been sending more people to jail than any other country in the world, the high percentage of those behind the bars may be innocent citizens who were wrongfully convicted of crimes they never committed.

Weak and questionable evidence given in courts of law has sent innocent citizens to jail while the real criminals are still in the streets roaming. The study has also concluded that high instances of wrongful conviction has been as a result of

Eyewitness misidentification
Invalidated or improper forensics
False confessions or Admissions

Reference List

Anderson, T; Dubin Jenny. (2008). DNA Helps Free Inmate After 27 Years. CBS News. Web.

Anonymous, (2005). Eye Witness Identification. A Policy Review. Web.

Candle, I., Merckelbach, H., Loyen, S., & Reyskens, H. (2005). Suggestibility And Children’s False Admissions of Guilt. Canadian Journal of Police and Security Services.

Collins, J. M; &Jarvis, J. (2009). Contextual Contamination of Forensic Evidence by Post-Conviction Litigators. Crime Lab Report, 1921 W. Wilson Street, Suite A-252, Batavia, IL 60510. Web.

Edwards, H.T; Gatsonis, C. (2009). Strengthening forensic science in the United States. A path. National Academy of Sciences. US government Printing Serial Number 111-28. Web.

Kassin,S.M; Drizin, S. A; Grisso,T; Gudjonsson, G. H; leo, R. A ; Redlich, A. D. (2010). Police-Induced Confessions: Risk Factors and Recommendations. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!