Defining the problem

A false confession occurs when an innocent individual admits to a crime they did not commit. These confessions can range from a vague statement of guilt to a fully detailed account of the crime.

According to the National Registry of Exonerations, false confessions are factors in 13 percent of wrongful convictions. In homicide cases, false confessions contribute to 22 percent of wrongful convictions 

Young people are particularly vulnerable to false confessions – studies indicate that juveniles are 2-3 times more likely to falsely confess during police questioning. People with intellectual disabilities and mental illness are also at heightened risk of false confessions.

Types of false confessions

1. Voluntary Confessions 

These occur without external pressure from police interrogation or media. People may voluntarily confess because:

  • They want to protect the real perpetrator
  • They wish to gain notoriety or attention
  • They are unable to distinguish between reality and fantasy due to mental illness

2. Coerced Compliant Confessions 

These occur when suspects knowingly give a false confession to escape a stressful interrogation or gain a promised reward. The person:

  • Knows they are innocent
  • Confesses to gain a short-term benefit (ending interrogation, promised leniency in punishment)
  • Acts out of psychological pressure or exhaustion

3. Coerced-Internalized Confessions 

This is the most psychologically complex type of confession in which innocent people come to believe they may have actually committed the crime. This can happen when:

  • Memory is impaired (due to stress, exhaustion, or substance use)
  • Interrogators convince them they have repressed memories
  • They are presented with false evidence that seems compelling

How and why do false confessions occur?

Psychological Factors

Numerous psychological factors can increase the risk of someone giving a false confession including diminished mental capacity as a result of stress, exhaustion, or a pre-existing condition; stress and trauma from aggressive questioning; desire to end the interrogation; age of the subject; cognitive limitations or mental illness; fear of violence or infliction of harm by the interrogator; duress, coercion, or force; substance use; etc.

Interrogation Tactics

Certain interrogation tactics increase the risk of false confessions including deceptive interrogation techniques that present false or misleading evidence; minimization of the crime; exaggeration of the crime or its consequences; and promises of leniency.

Legal Understanding

Lack of understanding of the law, absence of legal counsel, or a misunderstanding of the law can increase the likelihood of a person falsely confessing. Lack of legal representation especially impacts populations who are already at a higher risk of falsely confessing (e.g. youth, a person with an intellectual disability).

How can we prevent and remedy false confessions?

A Minnesota Supreme Court decision mandates that all interrogations be electronically recorded with audio and video. Recordings are not mandated in North or South Dakota, but law enforcement officials say recording is widely practiced even without a statutory mandate. These recordings help both prosecutors and defense lawyers accurately portray the confession of the accused while also identifying false confessions. However, this is just the beginning for strategies that may be implemented to prevent false confessions. Other strategies include: 

  • Time limits on interrogations 
  • Recognition of sleep deprivation or diminishing mental capacities in interrogations 
  • Special protections for vulnerable populations (e.g. juveniles and people with intellectual disabilities)
    • Having an adult or advocate in the room 
    • Special protocols when interrogating intellectually disabled individuals 
    • Regular screenings for mental state during long interrogations 
  • Training reform for investigators and interrogators to focus on rapport-based interrogation techniques
  • Pass legislation making confessions inadmissible in court if law enforcement knowingly used deception during custodial interrogation

Cases in which a false confession occurs should be remedied by: 

  • A motion to suppress the evidence gathered stemming from the improper interrogation 
  • Expert testimony in trial regarding false confessions and interrogation methods
  • Post-conviction review – including any testing of new evidence to exonerate wrongfully convicted defendants (e.g. DNA testing)

Case Examples

In both Terry Olson and Robert Bintz‘s cases, co-defendants falsely confessed and falsely implicated Terry and Robert in murders that neither actually committed.

In Terry’s case, there was no physical evidence linking Terry to the crime, and prosecutors relied heavily on the coerced confession of a severely mentally ill man, in addition to jailhouse informants, to build a case against Terry.

In Robert’s case, a jailhouse informant pointed to Robert’s brother, David, as the perpetrator in a cold case murder. When investigators interviewed David, David had a bizarre and contradictory conversation with police in which he admitted that the jailhouse informant’s statement was true, implicated his brother Robert, but also denied being involved in, or knowing anything about, the murder. Subsequent DNA testing excluded the brothers from the crime scene, but they were still convicted largely based on the false confession and jailhouse informant testimony.

Terry Olson
Robert Bintz