759 users online (105 members and 654 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 152
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Boca Baton, FL
    Posts
    585
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDuchess View Post
    Interesting list of 10 notorious false confessions, although the Ryan Ferguson one is a bit sketchy in that he's still in prison.

    Very interesting how many of these cases involve young men with low IQs.

    http://listverse.com/2013/05/22/10-c...e-confessions/
    Great list!

    Brief update on Ryan Ferguson. He was exonerated and released in November 2013. http://freeryanferguson.com/updates

    Sent from my Nexus 5X
    Last edited by Moxie Vi; 01-12-2016 at 05:41 PM. Reason: Fix url
    "He who does not prevent a crime when he can, encourages it.
    ~ Lucius Annaeus Seneca

    My confession... I


  2. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    402
    IMO, Dassey's confession and conviction are some of the saddest and most horrendous injustices from this whole mess.

    I highly, highly recommend anyone looking to get an objective view on Brendan's confession read them in order, and also read the 5/13 confession (although it wasn't used in court because Kachinsky was completely incompetent). Looking at them in progression makes it very clear the tactics used by police, and the little information Brendan actually knows.

    I've taken notes on all 500 some pages of Brendan's interviews, and have shared portions of them for context in threads #1 and #2. I also had a list of all the questions Brendan can't answer/information given by officers to Brendan in thread #1. After reading through all of them it is obvious to me Brendan knows little of value about the crime. I'd be happy to do any contextual posts on information given by Brendan similar to the posts I've done before if people want certain things cleared up, or find certain sections especially convincing.

    Thank you to everyone posting info about false confessions on this thread. It is one of the most misunderstood phenomenas in the legal world- the common belief being people would never confess to a crime they didn't commit. This belief is proven completely false, and Brendan's case is doing so much good in bringing this to light. As so many have stated, children and those with low IQs are especially vulnerable. Brendan, unfortunately, was both.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,438
    Quote Originally Posted by stephsb View Post
    I'd be happy to do any contextual posts on information given by Brendan similar to the posts I've done before if people want certain things cleared up, or find certain sections especially convincing.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I personally have looked back on your other posts numerous times. It's a bit of digging.

    I think what would be helpful is maybe a list of things that were mentioned BEFORE brendan mentioned them, and a list of things that brendan mentioned BEFORE they mentioned them (likely a much smaller list).

    Although, I think that the missing interviews like the one in the back of the squad car is likely the beginning of inside details , but we don't have that.

    It could even be that interview that had him so worried about Steve actually being guilty. To know what they told him, could explain his state of mind up until 2/27.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    402
    Quote Originally Posted by MaxManning View Post
    I personally have looked back on your other posts numerous times. It's a bit of digging.

    I think what would be helpful is maybe a list of things that were mentioned BEFORE brendan mentioned them, and a list of things that brendan mentioned BEFORE they mentioned them (likely a much smaller list).

    Although, I think that the missing interviews like the one in the back of the squad car is likely the beginning of inside details , but we don't have that.

    It could even be that interview that had him so worried about Steve actually being guilty. To know what they told him, could explain his state of mind up until 2/27.
    I can start looking at a list of things they mentioned before Brendan mentioned them. I've had more trouble developing a list of things Brendan mentions first because he really gives up very little info w.o prompting. I've thought of compiling a list of answers he gives that aren't simply yes/no, but even then, a lot of that info comes through leading questions, or insinuations of what the police are looking for, or just plain guessing. (Like when asked how she was bound- he answers rope...same answer i would give if I had no idea how a woman was bound)

    Another way I've thought of looking at information that would be far more time-consuming would be going through each allegation from the criminal complaint (which would be taken from the 3/1 confession) and show the process LE took to get him to give that statement. My goal from all of this is to try and help people understand there was virtually nothing of use in that confession.

    Thanks for going back and looking at my prior posts- legal interviewing/investigation is one of the best classes I took while working on my paralegal degree, and it was taught by a WI defense attorney. Our midterm was to go through a police interview and decide what was usable information, what questions were bad, and what information came as a result of those bad questions. I used a similar process when going through Brendan's statements.

    One last thing I'd like to add that complicates Brendan's case is the missing interviews (as you noted) AND what information he is giving police that came from things he heard secondhand (through media, family, school, etc.)


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,438
    Quote Originally Posted by stephsb View Post
    I can start looking at a list of things they mentioned before Brendan mentioned them. I've had more trouble developing a list of things Brendan mentions first because he really gives up very little info w.o prompting. I've thought of compiling a list of answers he gives that aren't simply yes/no, but even then, a lot of that info comes through leading questions, or insinuations of what the police are looking for, or just plain guessing. (Like when asked how she was bound- he answers rope...same answer i would give if I had no idea how a woman was bound)

    Another way I've thought of looking at information that would be far more time-consuming would be going through each allegation from the criminal complaint (which would be taken from the 3/1 confession) and show the process LE took to get him to give that statement. My goal from all of this is to try and help people understand there was virtually nothing of use in that confession.

    Thanks for going back and looking at my prior posts- legal interviewing/investigation is one of the best classes I took while working on my paralegal degree, and it was taught by a WI defense attorney. Our midterm was to go through a police interview and decide what was usable information, what questions were bad, and what information came as a result of those bad questions. I used a similar process when going through Brendan's statements.

    One last thing I'd like to add that complicates Brendan's case is the missing interviews (as you noted) AND what information he is giving police that came from things he heard secondhand (through media, family, school, etc.)


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Agreed. I also think it's plausible to believe that even kayla's statement originated from media/school/family information. Which is the whole reason Brendan gets sucked back in.

    Which is why I have interest in that first interview. For any kid, being in the back of a squad car is going to be impactful. So if someone is talking to you about what they think your uncle did and accusing you of hiding something, that would seem reasonable for a kid to be worried about something like that happening again in the future. No kid wants to go through that. Also , might lead a kid to wonder about if his uncle would do such a thing, and that might be traumatic as well.


    I don't know what the best format would be. But I see so often people saying that he said *something* and how could he have known that ?

    So one post shows everything he was told first, which I assume is a massive list, compared to a rather small list of what he offered FIRST. Would drive home the point that he knew very little until told.

    Then I guess that list could then be expanded to maybe include a number by each detail, indicating the interview it was first mentioned -- so we know when he first heard it.

    So maybe 1 = squad car, 2 = school 2/27 , 3 = police station 2/27, 4 = hotel 2/27 etc

    That way we get a feeling for how early he was exposed to these things and it's quick reference to find that dialog.

    That's a big part of why I have been referring back to your notes, so I can find the dialog easily as opposed to searching through pdfs each time. But I might have to check multiple posts to find the first occurrences of a given topic.

    I think the people new to the case, seeing that kind of data very early on, can quickly expose them to how much was fed to him, without digging and doing the work you already have done.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    402
    Quote Originally Posted by MaxManning View Post
    Agreed. I also think it's plausible to believe that even kayla's statement originated from media/school/family information. Which is the whole reason Brendan gets sucked back in.

    Which is why I have interest in that first interview. For any kid, being in the back of a squad car is going to be impactful. So if someone is talking to you about what they think your uncle did and accusing you of hiding something, that would seem reasonable for a kid to be worried about something like that happening again in the future. No kid wants to go through that. Also , might lead a kid to wonder about if his uncle would do such a thing, and that might be traumatic as well.


    I don't know what the best format would be. But I see so often people saying that he said *something* and how could he have known that ?

    So one post shows everything he was told first, which I assume is a massive list, compared to a rather small list of what he offered FIRST. Would drive home the point that he knew very little until told.

    Then I guess that list could then be expanded to maybe include a number by each detail, indicating the interview it was first mentioned -- so we know when he first heard it.

    So maybe 1 = squad car, 2 = school 2/27 , 3 = police station 2/27, 4 = hotel 2/27 etc

    That way we get a feeling for how early he was exposed to these things and it's quick reference to find that dialog.

    That's a big part of why I have been referring back to your notes, so I can find the dialog easily as opposed to searching through pdfs each time. But I might have to check multiple posts to find the first occurrences of a given topic.

    I think the people new to the case, seeing that kind of data very early on, can quickly expose them to how much was fed to him, without digging and doing the work you already have done.
    Is the squad car interview online? I know we don't have the 2/27 hotel one (but I could go through the trial transcripts and see at least what LE testified to). I can start working on these things later tonight- I'd like to try and get as much done before I go back to school as my time will unfortunately be much more limited once that happens, as I have a pretty full semester.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    305
    I just wanted to add a quick thought. To me, it seems like Brendan might think that he can't go home (and watch Wrestlemania) until he tells them some story about his uncle and Teresa. All he wants is to go home and watch his favourite show. So he thinks this is the entire deal, with his IQ. "If I tell them this story they want me to say, I'll go home and watch TV." I don't think he's even thinking about jail for himself, it seems his imagined bargain is only a short-term situation.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    402
    Quote Originally Posted by Ellie9 View Post
    I just wanted to add a quick thought. To me, it seems like Brendan might think that he can't go home (and watch Wrestlemania) until he tells them some story about his uncle and Teresa. All he wants is to go home and watch his favourite show. So he thinks this is the entire deal, with his IQ. "If I tell them this story they want me to say, I'll go home and watch TV." I don't think he's even thinking about jail for himself, it seems his imagined bargain is only a short-term situation.
    I agree entirely. He believes LE is on his side, that they know the truth and once they get it they will take care of him. So he guesses at the answer they want so he can go back to class (he has a project he needs to present). They promise him over and over they'll take care of him, they'll go to bat for him, just tell them the truth. So he continues to try and give them "the truth". It nearly breaks my heart when they tell him in the 3/1 interview that they have to arrest him and he goes "just for tonight?" It is so beyond obvious that he has no idea that hes just confessed to first degree murder, first degree sexual assault, and mutilation of a corpse, and no, he isn't going to be going home, not any time soon. That part of the interview was almost impossible for me to read through it was so upsetting.

  9. #24
    shadowraiths's Avatar
    shadowraiths is offline LISK Liaison, Verified Forensic Psychology Specialist, infoSec Architect
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,867
    Found a new court document, see post 16 of thread, Documents: Brendan Dassey - No Discussion

    Excerpt (p67-68)

    In an email dated April 27, he asked Kachinsky to “protect” that evidence “for the prosecution in Avery’s case” because it could “corroborate [Brendan’s] testimony and color him truthful.” (R.192:43-47; R.170:64.)

    Kachinsky e-mailed this information directly to D.A. Kratz and Wiegert on May 5 – adding, moreover, that O’Kelly’s information “may go a long way toward getting you...PC for another search of the Avery salvage yard.” (R.173:338; R.189:237; R.190:11; R.181.) (App. 487.)

    Crucially, Kachinsky disclosed this information to the State without his client’s knowledge or consent. (R.189:237.)

    And while he did it without apparent concern for the fact that Brendan was claiming his innocence, he was concerned enough about his own role to request that he “stay unnamed in any affidavit for a search warrant.” (R.181; R.173:338.) (App. 487.)

    Brendan, of course, had described handling a knife in his March 1 confession (R.79:34:586-87) (App. 281-82); thus, had it existed, that knife could have yielded damning fingerprint or DNA evidence.

    Fortunately, O’Kelly’s hunch was wrong; the State’s investigators went straight to the salvage yard but found no knife at all. (R.193:88.)

    Comment: I honestly do not see how that tainted confession was allowed in the courtroom. Hopefully, an attorney can clarify.



    Forensic Psychology Portal

    I tend to disappear from Websleuths from time to time.
    If I do, you can usually find me on
    Twitter.


  10. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,301
    Kachinsky is the literal worst.


  11. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,461
    Here is a (lengthy, very informative ) article about false confessions, with special emphasis on the Reid technique that was used on Brendan. I agree with the author's ending recommendations, particularly that the police should not be allowed to lie about evidence. (Especially heinous, when repeatedly calling Brendan a liar whenever he strayed from their script).

    http://thepsychreport.com/conversati...e-confessions/
    Last edited by Safeguard; 01-13-2016 at 10:47 AM.

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,438
    Quote Originally Posted by stephsb View Post
    Is the squad car interview online? I know we don't have the 2/27 hotel one (but I could go through the trial transcripts and see at least what LE testified to). I can start working on these things later tonight- I'd like to try and get as much done before I go back to school as my time will unfortunately be much more limited once that happens, as I have a pretty full semester.
    I am unable to find either interview. The dassey trial says they played a tape to the jury, but no transcript. Judge asks for that, and at that time they said it didn't exist. Do the tapes exist somewhere online ? Possibly. I haven't done a big search, but I will do so.

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,438
    Watching Kachinsky makes me feel like I am watching complete fiction, because I just can't believe it's possible for someone to be so slimy. Same with Kratz.

    On a lighter note, if there was a movie made on this trial using actors, who would you cast for the roles ? Edit - Maybe this should be another thread

    There is no doubt in my mind that'd I want jonah hill to play Kratz.
    Martin Freeman would make a good Kachinsky.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    402
    Quote Originally Posted by Safeguard View Post
    Here is a (lengthy, very informative ) article about false confessions, with special emphasis on the Reid technique that was used on Brendan. I agree with the author's ending recommendations, particularly that the police should not be allowed to lie about evidence. (Especially heinous, when repeatedly calling Brendan a liar whenever he strayed from their script).

    http://thepsychreport.com/conversati...e-confessions/
    So glad you mentioned the Reid Technique. This is SUCH a poor system for getting the truth, and ultimately, that is what LE should be looking for.

    I totally agree that LE should not be able to lie to the person being questioned, this is why everyone should go into a police investigation w. a lawyer. Most common people don't know that it is completely legal for police to lie to you during an interview, while lawyers do. Tactics like the Reid technique aren't likely to be tried in front of an attorney.

    In a perfect world, I think LE should be asking open ended questions to try and obtain the most information possible, and then asking questions based off that information. If the suspect is lying, it becomes harder and harder for them to keep their lies straight, especially if both LE officers are asking questions in a rapid fire form. They especially shouldn't be giving the suspect information crucial to the case, because as soon as that info is given, there is no way to tell if the suspect came up w. it on their own or because they were prompted and are trying to give the answers they believe they want. The example of this in Brendan's interview would be when they give him the info that Teresa was shot in the head- information that he clearly couldn't produce on his own but suddenly "remembered" as soon as Wiegert told him.

    I think the biggest takeaway from Brendan's case is that as soon as your Miranda rights are being read to you, ask for the attorney. Brendan may have still faced charges based on his earlier statements, but if that 3/1 interview had not happened, he would NEVER have been charged w. First Degree Murder and First Degree Sexual Assault based off his 2/29 statements alone. Far too often people believe that they don't need to ask for an attorney because they didn't commit a crime, and that couldn't be further from the truth. If you ask for an attorney, the worst thing that can happen is people suspect you are guilty (only "guilty" people need attorneys)- let them think that, at least you won't be at risk for confessing to a crime you didn't commit.

  15. #30
    shadowraiths's Avatar
    shadowraiths is offline LISK Liaison, Verified Forensic Psychology Specialist, infoSec Architect
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    2,867
    Quote Originally Posted by stephsb View Post
    So glad you mentioned the Reid Technique. This is SUCH a poor system for getting the truth, and ultimately, that is what LE should be looking for.

    I totally agree that LE should not be able to lie to the person being questioned, this is why everyone should go into a police investigation w. a lawyer. Most common people don't know that it is completely legal for police to lie to you during an interview, while lawyers do. Tactics like the Reid technique aren't likely to be tried in front of an attorney.

    In a perfect world, I think LE should be asking open ended questions to try and obtain the most information possible, and then asking questions based off that information. If the suspect is lying, it becomes harder and harder for them to keep their lies straight, especially if both LE officers are asking questions in a rapid fire form. They especially shouldn't be giving the suspect information crucial to the case, because as soon as that info is given, there is no way to tell if the suspect came up w. it on their own or because they were prompted and are trying to give the answers they believe they want. The example of this in Brendan's interview would be when they give him the info that Teresa was shot in the head- information that he clearly couldn't produce on his own but suddenly "remembered" as soon as Wiegert told him.

    I think the biggest takeaway from Brendan's case is that as soon as your Miranda rights are being read to you, ask for the attorney. Brendan may have still faced charges based on his earlier statements, but if that 3/1 interview had not happened, he would NEVER have been charged w. First Degree Murder and First Degree Sexual Assault based off his 2/29 statements alone. Far too often people believe that they don't need to ask for an attorney because they didn't commit a crime, and that couldn't be further from the truth. If you ask for an attorney, the worst thing that can happen is people suspect you are guilty (only "guilty" people need attorneys)- let them think that, at least you won't be at risk for confessing to a crime you didn't commit.
    Imo, people should ask for an attorney the minute LE wants to question them, and stay silent from there on out. People mistakenly believe miranda is required before questioning, when in reality, it is only required when they're being arrested. LE actually counts on this, as they will try to get as much information out of the person as possible. If challenged, they can simply point out that the individual was free to leave at any time. Even though, said individual may not have felt they were.



    Forensic Psychology Portal

    I tend to disappear from Websleuths from time to time.
    If I do, you can usually find me on
    Twitter.


Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Brendan Dassey's Habeas Corpus Petition Granted
    By Itsmevkb in forum Netflix Series: Making A Murderer
    Replies: 1100
    Last Post: 06-22-2017, 08:06 PM
  2. Steven Avery & Brendan Dassey get new representation
    By bessie in forum Netflix Series: Making A Murderer
    Replies: 187
    Last Post: 09-04-2016, 02:34 PM
  3. Documents: Brendan Dassey *No Discussion*
    By bessie in forum Netflix Series: Making A Murderer
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 08-12-2016, 04:26 PM

Tags for this Thread