844 users online (130 members and 714 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 160
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,111

    On False Confessions

    I don't know if this great site on false confessions and coerced testimony has been linked here. Thanks to poster Malkmus for posting it in the Amanda Knox thread.


    http://www.injusticebusters.com/04/L...lizabeth.shtml

  2. #2
    Very interesting, indeed, Nova. I wonder if Ms. Loftus has heard about Jessie's confession and what she'd say about it, too.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,111
    Quote Originally Posted by Compassionate Reader View Post
    Very interesting, indeed, Nova. I wonder if Ms. Loftus has heard about Jessie's confession and what she'd say about it, too.
    At first I was a little surprised it wasn't mentioned. But then I realized that of course the professor isn't going to comment on a case unless she has done formal work on it.

  4. #4
    Here's another video about false confessions:

    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDRRwFfJKkw&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

    It is a bit over nine minutes long, but it's worth the time. I originally saw it over on one of the yuku discussion boards about the case, and it is very informative.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Bellevue, WA
    Posts
    30

    Mr. Big

    There is a great movie (documentary) that includes some professionals speaking on false confessions. It is titled "Mr. Big."

    http://www.mrbigthemovie.com/

    I was actually interviewed for the movie (but not about false confessions) because I blogged the trial of the movie maker's brother (Sebastian Burns). It's a great movie (even if I do say so myself!).

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    DFW
    Posts
    6,915
    There was NOTHING False about Jessie's Second Confession.

    The reason why he told so many confessions is because the guilt was eating him up and he could not stand it anymore.

    I really think the lesson here is: DON'T BRAG ABOUT A MURDER IF YOU ARE INNOCENT.

  7. #7
    Jessie's statements were not simply false confessions; they were coerced by the interrogators who IMO unethically preyed upon his mental disability to get what they needed to convict an innocent man, Damien Echols. They had no idea that Jessie would implicate himself, or anyone else for that matter. If you recall, Jessie's original statement was that the crimes were committed by Damien and Robert Burch. He had to be led (coerced) into naming Jason. Of course, no one from the WMPD will ever admit this because careers have been made on this case, and "good old boys" stick together.

    In the case of the infamous "second confession," the prosecution had been working on Jessie for quite a while, against the express instructions of his attorneys, to try to get him to testify at the Echols/Baldwin trial. Again, this is something that will never be openly admitted, but the simple fact that the defense team had to be called in to witness the statement, and it was not made at the prison, lends circumstantial evidence to the idea I've put forth. As everyone knows, he did not testify. If he was so racked with guilt, why would he not relieve the pressure by testifying at the E/B trial? Because, after his daddy told him to tell the truth, he was not of any use to the prosecution as he would not have implicated Damien or Jason.

    Bottom line, none of Jessie's statements are totally consistent with the evidence, especially as now understood. As time passed, his statements became more accurate. His most accurate statement (and even this one was not totally accurate, even regarding the evidence as then understood) was the "second confession" which occurred after he had sat through his own trial and heard the prosecution's case presented in detail.

    Even someone with Jessie's mental disability would be able to regurgitate much of the information from the trial, especially after he was coached by the prosecution, which IMO happened. They even convinced him that his own attorneys were not on his side. Just read the interaction between Jessie and his attorneys immediately preceding the statement and you'll see what I mean.

    Jessie's disability makes him easily manipulated. If he testifies at the hearing in December and the State is able to make him change his story, the redirect will make him change it right back. Then, Judge Laser will be able to see for himself just how easy it is to manipulate Jessie. Then, Judge Laser will do what should have been done in 1994 and throw out his statements, all of them, and the State's case with them.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Bellevue, WA
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by iluvmua View Post
    There was NOTHING False about Jessie's Second Confession.

    The reason why he told so many confessions is because the guilt was eating him up and he could not stand it anymore.

    I really think the lesson here is: DON'T BRAG ABOUT A MURDER IF YOU ARE INNOCENT.
    I'm confussed about your two conflicting statements. The first is that his confession was true, the second is that he's innocent. Which is it?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Palm Springs
    Posts
    19,111
    Quote Originally Posted by Donnabert View Post
    I'm confussed about your two conflicting statements. The first is that his confession was true, the second is that he's innocent. Which is it?
    She is convinced of his guilt. The second statement is facetious.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Southcentral Pennsylvania
    Posts
    549
    Quote Originally Posted by Compassionate Reader View Post
    Very interesting, indeed, Nova. I wonder if Ms. Loftus has heard about Jessie's confession and what she'd say about it, too.
    Yeah, she did a bang-up job in the Tim Hennis case.

    Ahahahaaaaa!


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Southcentral Pennsylvania
    Posts
    549
    No takers?

    Well, allow me...

    Tim Hennis raped and butchered a young mother in 1985. He also butchered her two little girls. Slit their throats.

    He was convicted and then given a new trial based on a technicality.

    In the second trial, Elizabeth Loftus testified that the eyewitness, Patrick Cone, who saw Hennis leaving Katie Eastburn's house on the night of the murders was "mistaken", and suffering from "false memories".

    Tim Hennis was acquitted, thanks largely to the 'expert' on false memories. He had a great life for the next 25 years, while his three victims moldered in their graves.

    Last year they finally got him on DNA evidence, which wasn't available in 1985.

    Lizzie Loftus. What a gem

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    12,328
    Quote Originally Posted by iluvmua View Post
    There was NOTHING False about Jessie's Second Confession.

    The reason why he told so many confessions is because the guilt was eating him up and he could not stand it anymore.

    I really think the lesson here is: DON'T BRAG ABOUT A MURDER IF YOU ARE INNOCENT.
    With all due respect, Jessie was not mentally capable of handling a confession without the liberty of a lawyer. He just wanted to go home and admitted as such. Just tell them what they want to hear and I can leave.

    I have a serious problem in believing a confession of a person with an IQ of 72, and who was interrogated for 12 hours. Of those 12 hours only 46 minutes were taped.

    IMHO Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin, and Jesse Misskelley Jr. were accused of and charged with the murders of three little boys without forensic evidence, without anything besides a confession from Jesse Miskelley Jr.

    There are many discrepancies in this case including much of Jesse’s confession. Wounds on the children thought to be bite marks did not match molds of the three’s teeth so they were assumed to be made with a serrated knife, now have been decided to be caused by animals.

    I'm sorry I can't stand by and let all this stuff go unnoticed. In 2012 they would have been acquitted (IMHO).

    MOO

    Mel

  13. #13
    Let me correct one false perception stated in the previous post (before the nons jump in here and start screaming that you are lying). Jessie was not interrogated for 12 hours. He was in custody prior to his arrest for about 12 hours, but the actual interrogation did not last the entire time. There was some down time in between the original statement, the "corrected" statement and the polygraph exam. Bottom line, only 40-some minutes of the interrogation were actually recorded, and, even by the most conservative of estimates, the actual interrogation took at least twice that time.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    379
    CR-How old was Jessie at the time of his interrogation?
    What you're dealing with is a horrendous crime. Three young boys murdered in cold blood. Just that alone upsets people. You look at the bodies and there are these savage injuries all over. It affects people emotionally and warps their judgement and then someone says, "Maybe it's satanic."

    And they say, "Well the only type of person who would do this would be someone like that."

  15. #15
    I'll double check, but I believe at the time of the arrests, Jessie was 17, Jason was 15 and Damien was 18.

Page 1 of 11 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Brendan Dassey and False Confessions
    By bessie in forum Netflix Series: Making A Murderer
    Replies: 151
    Last Post: 10-05-2017, 12:19 AM
  2. Confessions?
    By MurriFlower in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 02-03-2011, 05:08 AM
  3. False Leads, False Reports
    By MissHolmes in forum Skyla Whitaker and Taylor Placker
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 06-28-2008, 12:13 AM

Tags for this Thread