Interrogation, Confession, and Truth

Prof. Dr. Lutz Eidam LL.M.; Prof. Dr. Michael Lindemann; Prof. Dr. Andreas Ransiek LL.M. (Berkeley)

doi:10.5771/9783748904380

Summary

Die Vernehmung ermöglicht es dem Beschuldigten, rechtlich gehört zu werden. Er darf aber die Mitwirkung an der Aufklärung der Tat ablehnen und seine Aussage verweigern, was sowohl in Europa als auch den USA als Ausfluss des Rechts angesehen wird, sich nicht selbst belasten zu müssen. Aus Sicht der Strafverfolgungsbehörden ist es das Ziel, zumindest eine Aussage und andere für die Aufklärung der Tat relevante Informationen zu erhalten, um den tatsächlich Schuldigen bestrafen zu können. Die Beiträge dieses Bandes beschäftigten sich aus rechtvergleichender Perspektive mit diesem Spannungsverhältnis. Wie weit geht der Schutz des Rechts, sich nicht selbst belasten zu müssen? Welche Mittel dürfen jenseits des Verbots körperlichen Zwangs eingesetzt werden, um den Beschuldigten dazu zu bewegen, eine Aussage zu machen? Wie sind die Risiken falscher Geständnisse einzuschätzen? Wissenschaftler aus den USA, den Niederlanden und der Bundesrepublik Deutschland versuchen, Antworten zu geben. Mit Beiträgen vonJan H. Crijns, Universiteit Leiden; Marieke Dubelaar, Radboud Universiteit; Lutz Eidam, Universität Bielefeld; Robert Horselenberg, Universiteit Maastricht; Richard A. Leo, University of San Francisco School of Law; Anthony O’Rourke, University of Buffalo School of Law; Andreas Ransiek, Universität Bielefeld; Christopher Slobgin, Vanderbilt University School of Law; Dave van Toor, Universiteit Heerlen/Universität Bielefeld; Thomas Weigend, Universität zu Köln.

Search publication

Bibliographic data

Copyright year: 2020
ISBN-Print: 978-3-8487-6330-6
ISBN-Online: 978-3-7489-0438-0
Publisher: Nomos, Baden-Baden
Series: Schriften zum Internationalen und Europäischen Strafrecht
Volume: 43
Language: English
Pages: 214
Product type: Edited Book

Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis No access Pages 1 - 10
Thomas Weigend
1. I. Why Should the Suspect Serve as a Source of Information? No access Thomas Weigend
2. II. A Brief Journey to the Past No access Thomas Weigend
3. III. The Role of the Suspect before Trial No access Thomas Weigend
4. Thomas Weigend
  1. 1. Presumption of Innocence No access Thomas Weigend
  2. 2. Privilege against Self-Incrimination No access Thomas Weigend
5. Thomas Weigend
  1. 1. Non-Controversial Consequences No access Thomas Weigend
  2. Thomas Weigend
    1. a) Suspects and Non-Suspects No access Thomas Weigend
    2. b) Interrogation No access Thomas Weigend
  3. 3. Exclusion of Illegally Obtained Evidence No access Thomas Weigend
6. VI. Concluding Remarks No access Thomas Weigend
Anthony O’Rourke
1. Anthony O’Rourke
  1. 1. Litigating the Exclusionary Rule No access Anthony O’Rourke
  2. 2. Punishing Litigation of the Exclusionary Rule No access Anthony O’Rourke
2. II. Pretrial Self-Incrimination and the Constitutional Status of Miranda No access Anthony O’Rourke
3. Anthony O’Rourke
  1. 1. Miranda’s Truth-Seeking Function No access Anthony O’Rourke
  2. 2. The Questionable Accuracy of Pretrial Obstruction Punishment No access Anthony O’Rourke
Lutz Eidam
1. I. Introduction – making sense of „Comparative Criminal Law“ No access Lutz Eidam
2. II. „Nemo tenetur se ipsum accusare“ – some basics No access Lutz Eidam
3. Lutz Eidam
  1. 1. § 133 StPO – Summons / Citation to appear without giving details about the Criminal Investigation No access Lutz Eidam
  2. 2. § 133 StPO – Summons / Citation of a suspect that chose to remain silent No access Lutz Eidam
  3. 3. Medical Examination – Case (BGH NStZ 2019, 36) No access Lutz Eidam
  4. 4. The “Proberichter” – Case (BGH NJW 2019, 789) No access Lutz Eidam
  5. 5. Actual Policy: § 163g StPO-E No access Lutz Eidam
4. IV. Conclusion No access Lutz Eidam
Christopher Slobogin
1. Christopher Slobogin
  1. 1. Trickery and True Confessions No access Christopher Slobogin
  2. 2. Trickery and False Confessions No access Christopher Slobogin
  3. 3. Detection of False Confessions No access Christopher Slobogin
2. II. Does Trickery Impermissibly Undermine Dignity? No access Christopher Slobogin
3. Christopher Slobogin
  1. 1. Manipulative Techniques That Are Impermissibly Coercive No access Christopher Slobogin
  2. 2. Manipulative Techniques That Are Not Impermissibly Coercive No access Christopher Slobogin
  3. 3. The Rights Predicate and State Action No access Christopher Slobogin
  4. 4. Summary No access Christopher Slobogin
4. IV. Is Trickery Illegitimately Fraudulent? No access Christopher Slobogin
5. V. Conclusion No access Christopher Slobogin
D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
1. I. Introduction No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
2. II. Setting the stage: Introduction of the Mr. Big method No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
3. D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
  1. 1. The misclassification error No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
  2. D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
    1. a) Confrontation with (false) evidence during the interrogation No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
    2. b) The use of violence No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
    3. c) The use of psychological coercion No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
  3. 3. The contamination error No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
  4. 4. Content analysis of the confession No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
  5. D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
    1. a) Suggestibility No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
    2. b) Compliance No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
  6. 6. Conclusion No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
4. D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
  1. D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
    1. a) Reliability of the statement No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
    2. b) Autonomy No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
    3. c) Dignity No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
    4. d) Conclusion No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
5. V. General conclusion No access D.A.G. van Toor, R. Horselenberg
J.H. Crijns, M.J. Dubelaar
1. 1. Introduction No access J.H. Crijns, M.J. Dubelaar
2. 2. Interrogation of the suspect or accused in Dutch criminal justice No access J.H. Crijns, M.J. Dubelaar
3. 3. Origins and rationale of the right to silence No access J.H. Crijns, M.J. Dubelaar
4. 4. Exploring the scope of the right to silence in the Netherlands No access J.H. Crijns, M.J. Dubelaar
5. J.H. Crijns, M.J. Dubelaar
  1. 5.1 Use of trickery No access J.H. Crijns, M.J. Dubelaar
  2. 5.2 The ‘Mr. Big’ technique No access J.H. Crijns, M.J. Dubelaar
  3. 5.3 Adverse inferences No access J.H. Crijns, M.J. Dubelaar
  4. 5.4 Evidentiary presumptions No access J.H. Crijns, M.J. Dubelaar
6. 6. Conclusion No access J.H. Crijns, M.J. Dubelaar
Andreas Ransiek
1. Andreas Ransiek
  1. 1. German Police Manuals on Interrogation No access Andreas Ransiek
  2. 2. Police Interrogations Techniques before the Federal Criminal Court No access Andreas Ransiek
2. Andreas Ransiek
  1. 1. Statutory and Constitutional Law No access Andreas Ransiek
  2. Andreas Ransiek
    1. a) Unlawful Promises and Threats No access Andreas Ransiek
    2. b) Deception and Trickery No access Andreas Ransiek
    3. c) Severe Infringements of Free Will No access Andreas Ransiek
3. Andreas Ransiek
  1. 1. Truth: Interpretation of Events No access Andreas Ransiek
  2. 2. The Reality of False Confessions No access Andreas Ransiek
4. Andreas Ransiek
  1. 1. Videotaping the Interrogation No access Andreas Ransiek
  2. 2. Presence of Defense Counsel No access Andreas Ransiek
5. V. Conclusion No access Andreas Ransiek
6. References No access Andreas Ransiek
7. Abbreviations No access Andreas Ransiek
Richard A. Leo
1. I. Introduction No access Richard A. Leo
2. II. The Structural Logic of Police Deception During American Interrogation No access Richard A. Leo
3. Richard A. Leo
  1. (A) Simple Evidence Ploys No access Richard A. Leo
  2. (B) Orchestrated Evidence Ploys No access Richard A. Leo
4. IV. Minimization and Maximization Interrogation Techniques No access Richard A. Leo
5. V. Conclusion No access Richard A. Leo
6. References No access Richard A. Leo
Report on the Comparative Conference on Criminal Procedure at Bielefeld University, Interrogation, Confession, and Truth, 21 – 22 May 2019 No access Pages 209 - 214 Alexandra Westermann, Matthias Newerla