Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Saturday March 17 2018, @01:14PM   Printer-friendly
from the now-we-know-who-to-blame dept.

Teenagers are more likely to plead guilty to crimes they did not commit because they are less able to make mature decisions, new research shows.

Experts have called for major changes to the criminal justice system after finding innocent younger people are far more likely admit to offences, even when innocent, than adults.

Those who carried out the study say teenagers should not be allowed to make deals where they face a lesser charge in return for pleading guilty. The study suggests young people are more likely to be enticed by these deals, and take what they see as an advantageous offer even when they have done nothing wrong.

Most criminal convictions in the UK and the USA occur as the result of guilty pleas, rather than trial. This means the majority of convictions are the result of decisions made by people accused of crimes rather than jurors.

The research was carried out in the USA, where a system known as "plea bargaining" is utilised, but the academics say their discovery has implications for countries across the world that allow teenagers accused of crimes to receive a sentence or charge reduction by pleading guilty. Specifically, the researchers recommend restricting reductions that may entice innocent teenagers into pleading guilty and making it easier for teenagers to change pleas after they have been entered.

Other research has found adolescents are less able to perceive risk and resist the influence of peers because of developmental immaturity.

https://phys.org/news/2018-03-teenagers-guilty-crimes-didnt-commit.html

-- submitted from IRC


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 17 2018, @06:55PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 17 2018, @06:55PM (#654179)

    I had a case where they grilled a guy for an hour and a half. He never relented the whole time. Finally, they said, "Well, we have a summary of what was said here. Just sign it and we'll let you go." The guy signed it and they put him in cuffs. Turns out that the "summary" was actually a confession and he is charged with all sorts of crimes. The trial had already began before the police finally gave me a tape of the interview (the cop on the stand claimed it was lost until I crossed asking about the flagrant violations of the record laws) and they only did that because the judge threatened a mistrial unless they turned over the tape before then end of the business day. Lo and Behold, I had the recording on DVD in my hands less than 30 minutes later. As soon as I saw the tape, it was over. Thankfully, the guy was illiterate and was adamant that someone needed to read it to him. The cop then proceeds to "read" it to him, complete with the finger along the words. So, agreeing with what it "said," he signs it. BOOM! Cuffs come out seconds later. According to my client, you didn't need to be an expert in psychology to see how fast that jury turned. The impeachment of the prior day's testimony was just the icing on the cake.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by isostatic on Saturday March 17 2018, @07:00PM

    by isostatic (365) on Saturday March 17 2018, @07:00PM (#654180) Journal

    However that poor innocent chap still had a horendous time, including being detained for a crime he didn't commit, probably had his name in the papers, accusations about 'no smoke without fire' for the rest of his life, not to mention the cost of a defence lawyer.

    The cops in question should be paying for that -- not the state or city, it should come out of the corrupt cops salary, assets (house etc) and pension, and they should be in jail.

  • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Sunday March 18 2018, @01:55AM

    With just four words: "I want a lawyer."

    You should never, ever talk to the police for just the reasons you state. You have the right to remain silent. Use that right.

    Don't believe me? Then see what a defense attorney and a 20+ year LEO veteran have to say about it. [youtube.com]

    Don't like being so brief? How about "With all due respect [sir/madam], I decline to answer any questions. I wish to speak with an attorney."

    This is really important, as you need to affirmatively assert your right to remain silent rather than just remaining silent, as discussed in Berghuis v. Thompkins [wikipedia.org].

    --
    No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr