Why do criminals confess to their crimes?

AARRRGH

I have never understood this.

I read a lot of crime books, and the one theme which is common throughout is the fact that criminals regularly confess when caught, and that confession (which is often the only hard evidence) is used to convict them and their associates.

For example, today in the Independent, a girl who hid drugs for her boyfriend got a 4 year jail sentence. The evidence? Her confession.

Why don't criminals realise if they just repeat the phrase "I have nothing to say" they will most likely get away with their crimes? And why don't the bosses of crime gangs educate their members that they all should just repeat that phrase no matter what?

It can't be that criminals are utterly thick, because not confessing is a simple concept.

WTF?!

truecrippler

How many years did you get?

robinph

Becasue you get a lighter sentence if you confess and save plod the effort of trying to get even more evidence just to be sure of a conviction. If you know they are going to get you then make it easier for them and they will then make the sentence easier on you.

mega man

because if they are proven guilty when they havent confessed, theyll get a longer sentence, i think.
but if you were sure you couldnt be proven guilty of a crime you did commit, you could protest your innocence. everybody is innocent till proven guilty.

johnnyskeleton

The guards get it out of them. They start off by asking a few inane questions and then move on and try to catch them out. Sometimes they use threats and inducements to get them to confess but that's illegal. Occasionally, as in 1 in 10,000, the gardai will beat a confession out of them.

Most proper criminals say nothing. There is legislation which allows inferences to be drawn from silence, but this is usually only used in offences against the state (it is very time consuming). However, proper criminals are few and far between and the people who get caught and confess are usually people who got into a fight, use lots of drugs, is a natural spoofer or careless etc. A lot of people will go into the garda station and try to show their innocence and end up confessing.

It is well documented that some people falsely confess to crimes for various reasons.

AARRRGH

Very frequently though the Gardai don't have decent evidence - they are relying on the criminal to confess.

You are allowed say nothing when questioned.

rotinaj

For some reason, judges think this is a good thing and you should be rewarded for confessing.

Plead innocent and get 2 years

Plead guilty and get 2years suspended


Sh1t system

AARRRGH

Guys - don't confuse being in court and being in a Garda station getting questioned - they are two different things. By all means plead guilty in court, but it is pointless talking to the Gardai before hand, never mind admitting guilt!

petes

They probably get scared. The detectives are probably saying it to them i.e. if you confess now you'll get a lighter sentence.

I would have though tht they would have had something else to get the crim in the interview room in the first place.

AARRRGH

Insurgent wrote: »

I would have though tht they would have had something else to get the crim in the interview room in the first place.

They have "suspicion", but no one goes to jail beause of suspicion...

You're definitely going to go to jail if you confess though.

petes

AARRRGH wrote: »

They have "suspicion", but no one goes to jail beause of suspicion...

You're definitely going to go to jail if you confess though.

I get where you are coming from but I think it's the tactics they use once you are in there.

Earthhorse

A lot of people just want to get it off their chest. Seriously. It's nothing more than that.

mufc4lfe

ya i agree with last poster it guilt reallt and you may get a shorter sentence

AARRRGH

Insurgent wrote: »

I get where you are coming from but I think it's the tactics they use once you are in there.

Yeah I believe the Gardai can probably be very convincing, but since you are allowed say nothing (won't affect your jail sentence, you can still admit guilt in court) doesn't it make sense to just say nothing? Also, if you say nothing, they will have less evidence, so you are less likely to go to court...

I dunno, seems a no brainer to me...

petes

From this I have learned that if I'm ever hauled in I'm saying nothing.

RGDATA!

AARRRGH wrote: »

I have never understood this.

I read a lot of crime books...

you should read Crime and Punishment

mega man

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

The guards get it out of them. They start off by asking a few inane questions and then move on and try to catch them out. Sometimes they use threats and inducements to get them to confess but that's illegal. Occasionally, as in 1 in 10,000, the gardai will beat a confession out of them.

Most proper criminals say nothing. There is legislation which allows inferences to be drawn from silence, but this is usually only used in offences against the state (it is very time consuming). However, proper criminals are few and far between and the people who get caught and confess are usually people who got into a fight, use lots of drugs, is a natural spoofer or careless etc. A lot of people will go into the garda station and try to show their innocence and end up confessing.

It is well documented that some people falsely confess to crimes for various reasons.

i doubt the guards would beat the confession out of todays organised criminals?

delllat

saying nothing in the interview will not beat the majjority of charges unless they have absolutely nothing on you in which case you wouldnt be being interrogated in the first place

johnnyskeleton

mega man wrote: »

i doubt the guards would beat the confession out of todays organised criminals?

The less organised ones though.

AARRRGH

delllat wrote: »

saying nothing in the interview will not beat the majjority of charges unless they have absolutely nothing on you in which case you wouldnt be being interrogated in the first place

No they question "suspects" all the time.

mega man

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

The less organised ones though.

couldn't you just tell the ombudsman. would the evidence stand if they took those messures?

johnnyskeleton

mega man wrote: »

couldn't you just tell the ombudsman. would the evidence stand if they took those messures?

If the state can't prove that the confession was voluntary then the confession wouldn't stand. Clearly a confession beaten out of someone is not voluntary.

Wibbs

Earthhorse wrote: »

A lot of people just want to get it off their chest. Seriously. It's nothing more than that.

+1 especially in extreme cases like murder and to a lesser extent rape. I remember discussing this very thing with someone "in the trade" and he told me in the majority of cases he dealt with the murderer confessed, even when it was obvious there was litte or no evidence. Most murders are off the cuff and not exactly planned, so the result of seeing the body on the ground throws them. It's such an affront to most peoples idea of civilised behavior the mind sees it as abhorrent and needs to get it out. With the real cold loonies though you need the evidence.

RobbieC

you ever hear of the man who stole the Eiffel Tower?
probably the best con who ever lived.
his theory was if their is nothing on the horizon whats the point.
he managed to even con al capone out of alot of money back in the day.
but when asked why he confessed! he said it was pointless not to...
he was under the impression not confessing wud get em nowhere and was he not rite.

one could say ya cant hit them all with the same stick...
but not all them own up to their crimes.

even the ordinary decent criminal hates a liar;)

pwd

RobbieC wrote: »

you ever hear of the man who stole the Eiffel Tower?
probably the best con who ever lived.
his theory was if their is nothing on the horizon whats the point.
he managed to even con al capone out of alot of money back in the day.
but when asked why he confessed! he said it was pointless not to...
he was under the impression not confessing wud get em nowhere and was he not rite.

one could say ya cant hit them all with the same stick...
but not all them own up to their crimes.

even the ordinary decent criminal hates a liar;)

he sounds like an attention whore. He probably didn't really do anything.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

AARRRGH wrote: »

I have never understood this.

I read a lot of crime books, and the one theme which is common throughout is the fact that criminals regularly confess when caught, and that confession (which is often the only hard evidence) is used to convict them and their associates.

For example, today in the Independent, a girl who hid drugs for her boyfriend got a 4 year jail sentence. The evidence? Her confession.

Why don't criminals realise if they just repeat the phrase "I have nothing to say" they will most likely get away with their crimes? And why don't the bosses of crime gangs educate their members that they all should just repeat that phrase no matter what?

It can't be that criminals are utterly thick, because not confessing is a simple concept.

WTF?!

Because criminals have a conscience too...

5318008!

Sylvia Scrawny Scatterbrain wrote: »

Because criminals have a conscience too...

Not all crimes are immoral. I'd put it down to people not knowing how the system works, and thinking they'll get off more lightly if they confess. Also you're all underestimating the power of interrogation techniques.

Having survived a pretty intense interrogation in school I like to think i'd be a bit more prepared than your average person. I'd be nowhere near prepared enough for a proper garda interrogation though.

The Al Lad

Maybe this is why

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b3e_1235796552

Good old fashioned kick the sh1t outta ya police brutality