I read that a pair of brothers were freed from prison last Wednesday after spending the last 31 years behind bars for a crime they did not commit.
Henry McCollum and Leon Brown were convicted in 1983 of rape and murder of a young girl in North Carolina and sentenced to death. However, recent evidence exonerated the two of the crimes after DNA on a cigarette from the scene was found to belong to a convicted rapist and murderer who lived less than 100 yards from the girl at the time.
DNA evidence is used to help solve criminal cases and routinely shown on television dramas but it’s easy to forget that the technology is a relatively new technique that has only been around since 1985 and wasn’t used to exonerate until 1989.
More than 400 people have been exonerated from prison in the United States due to DNA evidence, more than 250 of them since 2000 and 87 exonerations last year alone.
It’s a rare but not uncommon phenomenon in the legal system and one that I studied for four years as a psychology research assistant at Iowa State University.
Under the direction of psychology and law professors Stephanie Madon, Max Guyll and Gary Wells, I spent about five hours each week working on collecting experiment data and analyzing results.
The primary focus of two experiments had to all do with wrongful convictions and exonerees. The department’s research examined how underlying psychological, cognitive and physiological processes lead suspects to false confessions of criminal behavior and witnesses to false eye witness identifications.
In Study 1, participants were instructed to individually complete a word problem portion of an exam and then to solve a second portion of the exam working with another participant (an actor). In half of the performed experiments, the actor would try to convince the participant to share an answer with them from the individual portion of the exam, effectively making them guilty of cheating and misconduct. (To no surprise, an overwhelming majority agreed to share an answer although instructed not to.)
Following the exams, the experimenter would confront the participant of academic misconduct and ask to speak, or interrogate, each of them separately asking them to sign a confession form.
Ninety-three percent of the guilty participants confessed, however, a surprising 43 percent of innocent participants also agreed to sign the confession form.
Henry McCollum and Leon Brown signed confession forms in 1983 and were convicted with no physical evidence.
Results suggest that increased authoritative pressure causes increased stress levels, forcing even innocent suspects to limit their ability to focus and process consequences. In an interrogation, suspects’ decision making is based on proximal consequences (getting out of an integration) rather than future consequences (being found guilty).
Twenty-five percent of wrongful convictions were due in part to damaging, yet false, confessions.
In Study 2, participants were asked to watch a short video of footage at an airport when an unexpected baggage theft occurs. Following the video, participants were asked to identify the thief among a selection of suspects. Some participants were given a line-up and others choices in pairs.
Results support the relative judgment theory, that people will subconsciously choose the closest looking individual when the actual criminal is never an option and can easily become certain of their choice. Memory is trusted although flawed and flexible.
Witnesses not only identify the most similar looking suspect, but when asked more than once, a witness becomes more positive about their identification. Also, positive reinforcement will further increase the witnesses certainty in their selection.
Witness identifications, whether correct or not, along with a testimony to the jury are sensational and incriminating. 75 percent of convictions which later resulted in an exoneration were due in large part to false witness identifications.
The purpose of the studies isn’t to undermine the legal system, in fact, it’s to help improve as well as examine the evidence behind wrongful convictions and to understand why and how human error occurs.
Confessions and witnesses are absolutely necessary, but if we can increase their reliability and accuracy then we as citizens have done our job to evolve the legal system, and can attempt to right our wrongs to any other Henry McCollum and Leon Browns out there.
Contact Staff Writer Kate Malott at (641) 792-3121 ext. 6533 or at kmalott@newtondailynews.com.