3 page paper 25
4 page essay
APA Format – no title page, abstract, or references needed
Please reference these videos
Part 2: Start at 23 minutes
Part 3: Start at 47 minutes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?
Brendan Dassey Police Interview / Interrogation Part #3 ( Making a Murderer Steven Avery Case )
|
Background: Brendan Dassey is a 16-year-old, with reported IQ score of 70 and enrolled in special education classes, who is suspected of assisting his uncle in a brutal rape and murder of a 26-year-old woman. The authorities relied heavily on the confession of Brendan to convict both he and his uncle because there was a lack of other physical evidence such as DNA, fingerprints, murder weapon and victims’ body.
This essay should include commentary on
- The style of interrogation used by officers. Do you think these detectives are using the Reid Method of interrogation?why or why not?
- A discussion of why Brendan is vulnerable to giving a false confession given his age. Part of this discussion should include Cleary’s factors.
- What type of false confession is Brendan making? Please explain why.
- What are your personal reactions to watching Brandan’s Interrogation? Please include your analytical response as well as your emotional response.
Attachments area
Brendan Dassey Police Interview / Interrogation Part #1 ( Making a Murderer Steven Avery Case )
Preview YouTube video Brendan Dassey Police Interview / Interrogation Part 2 ( Steven Avery Case )
Brendan Dassey Police Interview / Interrogation Part 2 ( Steven Avery Case )
Brendan Dassey Police Interview / Interrogation Part #3 ( Making a Murderer Steven Avery Case )
Thats an example of a paper
Brendan Dassey’s Interrogation
In 2005, Brendan Dassey would become tied up in a murder investigation. His uncle, Steven Avery, who always had a rocky relationship with police, had been accused of murdering a woman Teresa Halbach. Dassey, who lived close to his home, would become involved in the investigation as an alleged accomplice to Avery. Dassey’s involvement in the crime, from the beginning, was circumstantial he had visited his uncle on the day of the murder. There was no physical evidence or any reason to believe that the boy had been involved in the murder. There was, however, the need to create a narrative that a murder had occurred in that location and at that time, which would require Dassey being responsible or aware of the murder. It is under this assumption that police approach him when Dassey was only 16 years old with the intent to interrogate him. By the end of the interrogation session, Dassey had not only confessed to his uncle’s involvement in the rape and murder of Teresa Halbach but has framed himself as a participant in the violent act. Based on this confession, Avery and Dassey were prosecuted and sentenced for a crime that continues to lack solid physical evidence. In the aftermath of this event, the Dassey and Avery families have fought the convictions. Dassey’s appeals, involve the claims of a false confession, obtained through the predatory techniques of the police force. Though this argument has failed to ensure that Dassey sees freedom, when watching the tapes of the interrogation, it is clear that the confession provided by the boy was not ethically sourced.
Though the process of interrogation is a standard in most criminal investigation cases, the extraction of confessions through this route has been constantly criticized. One of the main reasons for the criticism is the possibility of extracting false confessions from subjects through hardened approaches. While this does not mean that confessions obtained in this manner are bound to be false, depending on the approach of the police officers working the case, an individual might feel compelled or coerced into providing false testimony. This occurred in Brendan Dassey’s case. For starters, it was allegedly well-known in the area that Dassey had developmental issues. Though the boy was sixteen at the time of the interrogation, he did not have the intellectual maturity of a boy his age. His IQ was lower than average, and he was enrolled in special education classes. These considerations alone should have warranted the presence of Dassey’s caregiver or guardian in the room during the process of interrogation, to ensure that the boy was clear on the implications of speaking to the police. In keeping Dassey alone who enters the room looking seemingly out of place the investigators likely knew that they were drawing and advantage. Though the rights are read, and the boy appears to agree with the considerations outlined by the officers, considering Dassey’s circumstances, informed consent cannot be guaranteed. From an ethical standpoint, the interrogation process does not appear to improve as it moves forward.
The interrogation process starts with the officers’ superficial acknowledgement of the boy’s fears. Dassey had previously spoken to the police officers and had hinted, at some point in their conversation, that the boy was afraid that he was going to be inculpated in the murder. While these fears are undoubtedly reasonable for someone who is related to Steven Avery who had previously spent 18 years in prison for a crime that he did not commit, the police use them as the foundations for the boy’s guilt. They also use these fears to guarantee the continual extraction of information with no hesitation, investigators tell Dassey that if he were to cooperate with the officers, then he would have an opportunity to distance himself from these fears. For Dassey, this likely meant that, if he were to cooperate with police and provide them the information they intended to hear, then he would be able to avoid a conviction altogether. The possibility of being tried for the crimes that investigators were urging the boy to describe is never conveyed, nor seemingly assumed by Dassey.
From then onwards, the investigators will rely on aspects of the Reid technique to extract the confession. The Reid Technique is characterized by the adherence to nine steps of questioning. The first step in this process it to alert the suspect that the police is aware of their involvement in a crime. The police do not need to have any evidence to back up these claims. They simply need to confidently convey the perceived culpability of the suspect. Dassey is repeatedly told by the police that they are aware that a crime took place in the property, that they know he is involved in the crime, and that they know he has been omitting information from then onwards. In response, Dassey begins to react putting up an uncomfortable demeanor, fidgeting, avoiding answers. The investigators, as prompted by this technique, assume that the boy is lying because of this physical response. Dassey shows some reluctance, at first, to accept his role as a possible perpetrator or as a witness, but the investigators continue badgering him about how they already know of his involvement, the evidence they allegedly have of his participation, and the problems that would come to Dassey were he to not comply moving forward. Also, in compliance with the Reid technique, the boy’s objections are turned against, framed as if he were admitting culpability through them. One by one, the boy’s defenses are shut down by police insistence until the boy loses his resolves and begins to provide them with the information that they want to hear.
During this process of confession, Dassey appears to be mostly reactive throughout the entire interview. It is the investigators who dominate the conversation. The details that are meant to be seen as a sign of culpability as they could have only been known by the perpetrator – are being partly provided to Dassey by the police. While there are elements of this confession that do not appear to be prompted by the authorities. For instance, Dassey’s description of how the rape took place. Key elements of the crime need to be given first to Dassey so he can build a narrative around it. There are various examples of this throughout the investigation for instance, when it comes to the fire, this was not a detail that Brendan had proactively given the officers. Unaware of the significance that the police had placed on the firepit, which was framed as the mechanism for the disposal of Halbach’s body, Dassey can only speak about the fire’s origins, not its use in the murder. It is until the investigators ask if the fire was used to dispose of the body that Dassey begins to speak about the connection of the fire and the crime. In another example, as Dassey is failing to provide a convincing explanation as to the actual murder, the police blatantly ask him if he shot Halbach. This detail had not been uttered by Dassey until the investigators put it on the table. In sum, the narrative is spun the investigators and Dassey is only given the option to agree with this narrative and provide complimentary details to it or to risk even more trouble a constant threat made by the investigators, if he sticks to his original story.
Dassey quickly caves to the pressure of the investigators, offering details that will help them support the narrative that they had already created. Because of the method that was used on Dassey’s, who was particularly vulnerable at the time, and the lack of physical evidence to corroborate the statements made by Dassey for instance, there is no physical evidence that a rape occurred nor blood splatter evidence in the house to indicate that a violent struggle took place inside as describedthe confession extracted that day can be seen as a false confession. Specifically, Dassey’s false confession can be categorized as a Compliant False Confession. Dassey goes along with the narrative presented by investigators because he fears the repercussions of not speaking. He is blatantly lied to in the process, being told continuously that the police already know and already has evidence of his involvement in the crime. He is also misled about the results of his cooperation, led to believe that his conversation with police will keep him out of trouble. Manipulation is a constant from the investigators’ side, as well, attempting to exploit the boy’s own fears to ensure that he does not contradict them. As it happens with most false confessions, Dassey recants what he says almost as soon as he can. For him, the realization that going along with the police’s questioning was not the right choice would not dawn until he was detained for the crime. Up to that point, he was under the impression that, after the interrogation, the entire ordeal would be over for him.
Watching the tapes of Dassey’s interrogation made me feel incredibly frustrated. Though I was already aware of the case due to the popular documentaries that have been produced around it, I had never seen the complete interview process. From the beginning, it seems clear to me that the boy is not aware of the implications of the situation. His reaction to the police questioning, getting more and more uncomfortable and confused as the conversation moves forward, is heart-wrenching. One cannot help but feel bad for the boy due to his age, his disabilities, and his confusion as the investigators continue prodding into his memories. It almost feels as if they were willingly taking advantage of the boy’s inability to contest with certainty their assertions. From a purely technical point of view, it could be argued that this is an example of the problems that have been inherently associated with the Reid technique. Though the approach can certainly be effective in certain scenarios, to use it when there is an absolute lack of evidence to corroborate the information that is meant to be extracted from the subject is inherently manipulative. To use a confession that has been extracted through this form and with no evidence to back it up should not be considered an acceptable part of the criminal justice process, due to the frequency with which this approach can lead to false confessions. Unto a more essential point, the fact that investigators can opt for a strategy that not only starts off the assumption that there is no way the individual can be innocent and which requires the constant manipulation of the interviewee’s words, makes this technique more of a liability than an asset for the criminal justice system.Brendan Dassey’s Interrogation
In 2005, Brendan Dassey would become tied up in a murder investigation. His uncle, Steven Avery, who always had a rocky relationship with police, had been accused of murdering a woman Teresa Halbach. Dassey, who lived close to his home, would become involved in the investigation as an alleged accomplice to Avery. Dassey’s involvement in the crime, from the beginning, was circumstantial he had visited his uncle on the day of the murder. There was no physical evidence or any reason to believe that the boy had been involved in the murder. There was, however, the need to create a narrative that a murder had occurred in that location and at that time, which would require Dassey being responsible or aware of the murder. It is under this assumption that police approach him when Dassey was only 16 years old with the intent to interrogate him. By the end of the interrogation session, Dassey had not only confessed to his uncle’s involvement in the rape and murder of Teresa Halbach but has framed himself as a participant in the violent act. Based on this confession, Avery and Dassey were prosecuted and sentenced for a crime that continues to lack solid physical evidence. In the aftermath of this event, the Dassey and Avery families have fought the convictions. Dassey’s appeals, involve the claims of a false confession, obtained through the predatory techniques of the police force. Though this argument has failed to ensure that Dassey sees freedom, when watching the tapes of the interrogation, it is clear that the confession provided by the boy was not ethically sourced.
Though the process of interrogation is a standard in most criminal investigation cases, the extraction of confessions through this route has been constantly criticized. One of the main reasons for the criticism is the possibility of extracting false confessions from subjects through hardened approaches. While this does not mean that confessions obtained in this manner are bound to be false, depending on the approach of the police officers working the case, an individual might feel compelled or coerced into providing false testimony. This occurred in Brendan Dassey’s case. For starters, it was allegedly well-known in the area that Dassey had developmental issues. Though the boy was sixteen at the time of the interrogation, he did not have the intellectual maturity of a boy his age. His IQ was lower than average, and he was enrolled in special education classes. These considerations alone should have warranted the presence of Dassey’s caregiver or guardian in the room during the process of interrogation, to ensure that the boy was clear on the implications of speaking to the police. In keeping Dassey alone who enters the room looking seemingly out of place the investigators likely knew that they were drawing and advantage. Though the rights are read, and the boy appears to agree with the considerations outlined by the officers, considering Dassey’s circumstances, informed consent cannot be guaranteed. From an ethical standpoint, the interrogation process does not appear to improve as it moves forward.
The interrogation process starts with the officers’ superficial acknowledgement of the boy’s fears. Dassey had previously spoken to the police officers and had hinted, at some point in their conversation, that the boy was afraid that he was going to be inculpated in the murder. While these fears are undoubtedly reasonable for someone who is related to Steven Avery who had previously spent 18 years in prison for a crime that he did not commit, the police use them as the foundations for the boy’s guilt. They also use these fears to guarantee the continual extraction of information with no hesitation, investigators tell Dassey that if he were to cooperate with the officers, then he would have an opportunity to distance himself from these fears. For Dassey, this likely meant that, if he were to cooperate with police and provide them the information they intended to hear, then he would be able to avoid a conviction altogether. The possibility of being tried for the crimes that investigators were urging the boy to describe is never conveyed, nor seemingly assumed by Dassey.
From then onwards, the investigators will rely on aspects of the Reid technique to extract the confession. The Reid Technique is characterized by the adherence to nine steps of questioning. The first step in this process it to alert the suspect that the police is aware of their involvement in a crime. The police do not need to have any evidence to back up these claims. They simply need to confidently convey the perceived culpability of the suspect. Dassey is repeatedly told by the police that they are aware that a crime took place in the property, that they know he is involved in the crime, and that they know he has been omitting information from then onwards. In response, Dassey begins to react putting up an uncomfortable demeanor, fidgeting, avoiding answers. The investigators, as prompted by this technique, assume that the boy is lying because of this physical response. Dassey shows some reluctance, at first, to accept his role as a possible perpetrator or as a witness, but the investigators continue badgering him about how they already know of his involvement, the evidence they allegedly have of his participation, and the problems that would come to Dassey were he to not comply moving forward. Also, in compliance with the Reid technique, the boy’s objections are turned against, framed as if he were admitting culpability through them. One by one, the boy’s defenses are shut down by police insistence until the boy loses his resolves and begins to provide them with the information that they want to hear.
During this process of confession, Dassey appears to be mostly reactive throughout the entire interview. It is the investigators who dominate the conversation. The details that are meant to be seen as a sign of culpability as they could have only been known by the perpetrator – are being partly provided to Dassey by the police. While there are elements of this confession that do not appear to be prompted by the authorities. For instance, Dassey’s description of how the rape took place. Key elements of the crime need to be given first to Dassey so he can build a narrative around it. There are various examples of this throughout the investigation for instance, when it comes to the fire, this was not a detail that Brendan had proactively given the officers. Unaware of the significance that the police had placed on the firepit, which was framed as the mechanism for the disposal of Halbach’s body, Dassey can only speak about the fire’s origins, not its use in the murder. It is until the investigators ask if the fire was used to dispose of the body that Dassey begins to speak about the connection of the fire and the crime. In another example, as Dassey is failing to provide a convincing explanation as to the actual murder, the police blatantly ask him if he shot Halbach. This detail had not been uttered by Dassey until the investigators put it on the table. In sum, the narrative is spun the investigators and Dassey is only given the option to agree with this narrative and provide complimentary details to it or to risk even more trouble a constant threat made by the investigators, if he sticks to his original story.
Dassey quickly caves to the pressure of the investigators, offering details that will help them support the narrative that they had already created. Because of the method that was used on Dassey’s, who was particularly vulnerable at the time, and the lack of physical evidence to corroborate the statements made by Dassey for instance, there is no physical evidence that a rape occurred nor blood splatter evidence in the house to indicate that a violent struggle took place inside as describedthe confession extracted that day can be seen as a false confession. Specifically, Dassey’s false confession can be categorized as a Compliant False Confession. Dassey goes along with the narrative presented by investigators because he fears the repercussions of not speaking. He is blatantly lied to in the process, being told continuously that the police already know and already has evidence of his involvement in the crime. He is also misled about the results of his cooperation, led to believe that his conversation with police will keep him out of trouble. Manipulation is a constant from the investigators’ side, as well, attempting to exploit the boy’s own fears to ensure that he does not contradict them. As it happens with most false confessions, Dassey recants what he says almost as soon as he can. For him, the realization that going along with the police’s questioning was not the right choice would not dawn until he was detained for the crime. Up to that point, he was under the impression that, after the interrogation, the entire ordeal would be over for him.
Watching the tapes of Dassey’s interrogation made me feel incredibly frustrated. Though I was already aware of the case due to the popular documentaries that have been produced around it, I had never seen the complete interview process. From the beginning, it seems clear to me that the boy is not aware of the implications of the situation. His reaction to the police questioning, getting more and more uncomfortable and confused as the conversation moves forward, is heart-wrenching. One cannot help but feel bad for the boy due to his age, his disabilities, and his confusion as the investigators continue prodding into his memories. It almost feels as if they were willingly taking advantage of the boy’s inability to contest with certainty their assertions. From a purely technical point of view, it could be argued that this is an example of the problems that have been inherently associated with the Reid technique. Though the approach can certainly be effective in certain scenarios, to use it when there is an absolute lack of evidence to corroborate the information that is meant to be extracted from the subject is inherently manipulative. To use a confession that has been extracted through this form and with no evidence to back it up should not be considered an acceptable part of the criminal justice process, due to the frequency with which this approach can lead to false confessions. Unto a more essential point, the fact that investigators can opt for a strategy that not only starts off the assumption that there is no way the individual can be innocent and which requires the constant manipulation of the interviewee’s words, makes this technique more of a liability than an asset for the criminal justice system.
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!
NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
