Exoneration case report Due date: 11:59 p.m. Sun Sep 30 Overview Read about a real case in which a defendant was convicted after making a false confession. Then apply what you’ve learned to suggest reasons that the defendant might have confessed. Please complete this assignment on your own, not with your team. Find a case Go to the National Registry of Exonerations website at http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/about.aspx Put your cursor on Browse Cases. In the drop down menu, click on Browse Cases. You will be taken to a new page, where you will see a table. Find the column heading Contributing Factors Display. When you put your cursor on this heading, you’ll be able to access a drop down menu. From this menu, choose False Confession. Select any case by clicking on the defendant’s last name and read it. You might want to browse a little to find an interesting case rather than just settling on the first one you come to. Write the paper Organize your paper into two sections as described below. Your typed case report should be about 400-800 words. Section 1: Summary Briefly summarize the case facts, making sure to discuss the confession. Be careful to describe what happened in your own words instead of just copying sentences from the website. Keep in mind that even when students provide the source for their work, they’re expected to include quotation marks when necessary (but use direct quotes sparingly) and write mainly in their own words. Section 2: Analysis What caused this wrongful conviction? In many cases, there were multiple factors, but be sure to discuss mainly the false confession. Refer explicitly to information you learned from the PowerPoint videos or the textbook that probably relate to the case. For example, depending on what the case facts are, it might make sense to talk about the Reid technique and its components and how the police did (or may have) used this technique to pressure the suspect to confess. Important! Notice that you’re supposed to discuss in detail what you’ve learned about false confessions and connect that info to the case you read. Don’t just list off some possible reasons for the confession that seem commonsense. Here’s a good example of what to do. See how I’m connecting what happened in the case to the info in Ppt video 3.3: “The police told Mark they had found his fingerprints on the gun, which wasn’t true. Presenting fabricated evidence to suspects is one of the maximization components of the Reid technique. Specifically, nonexistent fingerprints are the scientific type of false evidence, and research shows that false evidence ploys increase the chance of a false confession.” Now here’s an example of what not to do. See how I’m raising the issue of the suspect’s young age, which is a good start, but I didn’t link it to any information from the course about suspects’ ability to determine whether they’re in police custody or comprehend Miranda warnings, and I didn’t discuss how research shows a correlation between youth and false confessions: “Mark was only 15 years old, so he was probably very nervous and scared when the police interrogated him.” Remember, your goal is to demonstrate what you’ve learned, so provide plenty of detail! Acknowledgement This exercise was created by Dr. Amy Posey, Benedictine College. Learning objectives for this week  Demonstrate understanding of course content  Apply course content to real-world setting  Evaluate policy based on empirical evidence  Demonstrate recognition of discriminatory behavior  Work effectively with a group  Communicate ideas clearly, completely, and concisely

    Exoneration: Predicament of Robert Davis

    Predicament Summary

    On February 19, 2003, a offense that implicated a first-degree barringcher of Annette Charles and a second-degree barringcher of William happened in Virginia. Following system by the police about the neighborhood, William Fugget avowed that he has been implicated in the barringcher, implicating Jessica his sister, and Robert Davis who was some rare blocks abroad from Fugget’s abode. Later, police interrogated Jessica who harmoniously avowed to substance implicated in the offense, implicating her twin William and Robert Davis as accomplices. Davis was later interrogated by the police on his involvement in the offense. Initially, Davis destitute substance implicated in the offense. However, following five and a half hour of the incessant ignorance, composed, and timidity, Davis agreed to keep been implicated in the offense. On April 19, 2004, Davis was sentenced to 23 years in prison. However, in 2006, William Fugget wrote a missive that indicated that Davis was not attributable attributable attributable implicated in the offense whatsoever. A harmonious doctrines was current from Jessica who indicated that she was wickedness to keep implicated Davis in the offense. Following a considerate inducement of the salutation supposing by Davis Commandyer, McAuliffe considered this defence, releasing Davis from prison on December 15, 2015.

    Predicament Analysis

    Davis, who was 18 years and intangiblely handicapped was in a excellent pose to surrender a falsity doctrines. As indicated in the predicament, police had compact him to stay recover from 1.00 a.m. to 6.00 a.m. Following five hours of past slumber, composed, substance worn-out, and scared, Davis was left with not attributable attributablehing barring to promote that he had participated in the barringcher of Annette Charles and William. While recognition holds that any sinless special cannot attributable construct a falsity doctrines, Davis’ scenario could keep been compelled by his intangible qualification.

    In his internalization, Davis felt worn-out and disconcerted by the system, aid, as a habit of obliging the variance. Psychologically, intangiblely handicapped commonalty keep skilled through test that their centre is wickedness and coincident to the view or centre of others is a habit to survive. Aid, Davis’ unreasonable covet to defencese an potent emblem such as the police would keep easily compelled him to avow. Arguably, it’s love asking a baby to promote he did wickedness when a candy is to be surrendern as the decorate. Putting perfect these factors concertedly, Davis was greatly impressible to making a falsity doctrines.

    References

    Robert Davis: Other Virginia Defence Predicaments. (n.d.). Retrieved from The National Registry of Exonerations: http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=5058