ABSTRACT
One important factor that contributes to the judgment that a confession is likely true is the level of detail provided by the confessor. Surprisingly, false confessors often provide highly detailed accounts of the crimes they did not commit. A second factor that lends credence to a confession is motive. There are several types of suspect vulnerabilities that raise the risk of false confessions. Risk factors internal to the suspect include youth, mental retardation or cognitive impairment, mental illness, vulnerable personality, as well as various forms of temporary impairment. Expert testimony in disputed cases may be necessary because the traditional procedures of the adversarial system are not sufficient to safeguard innocent individuals against the likelihood of wrongful conviction based on unreliable confession evidence. Finally, the use of expert testimony in pretrial suppression hearings and at jury trials should exert an educative and corrective effect on the future behavior of police and prosecutors.
