Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Judging the Innocent

Posted on Behalf of Attorney Ross Goodman for Criminal Defense

If a person is arrested, that person has the choice to either talk and tell the truth or to remain silent. By stating that they’ll remain resilient against the accusation, the accused clearly desires not to answer any question until their legal representative is about. Supported by the Fifth Amendment Rights, the police cannot insist his/her questions without violating the law.

In some cases, the defendant would interpret silence as total admittance to the crime: they either confess on the violation they committed voluntarily or insists on his/her innocence. Assertion of the latter means fact-gathering and countless research to validate the argument of innocence. The former, however, means admission to the crime made and facing whatever penalties or punishments that the crime would incorporate.


Though through the years, legal professionals have grown alarmed as the number of false confession syndrome increased. Though not really a syndrome nor a mental illness, the term false confession syndrome was used to coin innocent people who admitted crimes they didn't commit. According to InnocenceProject, 25% of the suspects were wrongfully convicted for confession of crimes they were involved. Individuals, mostly youths, and defendants who find themselves hopeless against the prosecution are the most common member of the false confession syndrome population. Just recently, an article was published questioning why people do this.

There are laws protecting the innocent while struggling to align with the criminal justice system. However, such lies remain clouded until a more solid and strong evidence comes up to challenge the accuracy of words. This is despite the fact that confessions are unreliable sources but are still considered to be the basic form of evidence in a police investigation.

Did you find this post informative? If so, you can visit this website and submit a review: merchantcircle.com