Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1989, Page 3
Coerced Confessions:
The Logic of Seemingly Irrational Action
Richard Ofshe, Ph.D.
Department of Sociology
University of California
Berkeley, California
Abstract
Although a vital part of the criminal-justice system, interrogation procedures
employed by police seeking to extract confessions from suspects have been abused.
The case of Tom Sawyer is presented to illustrate how police can manipulate certain
vulnerable suspects into confessing to and even believing they have committed
crimes of which they have no memory and which evidence proves they could not
have committed. These unethically manipulative interrogation procedures can be
conceptualized as a form of thought reform.
In a recent landmark study, Bedau and Radelet (1987) identified 350 instances of
miscarriages of justice in which innocent persons were convicted of capital crimes in
America. In 49 of these cases, the cause of the miscarriage was a false confession elicited
in response to coercion.1
This paper will present a brief summary report of a portion of a study2 of four instances in
which false confessions3 to criminal acts were elicited from innocent individuals.4 The
crimes to which these individuals confessed included one substantial theft and three
exceptionally brutal murders. In all four instances, the confession was the only evidence
linking the suspect to the crime.5
Two of the accused murderers, George Abney and Peter Reilly, were subjected to trial. Mr.
Abney was acquitted. Mr. Reilly was found guilty. The Reilly verdict was overturned when it
was discovered that the prosecutor had suppressed evidence proving Mr. Reilly to have
been somewhere else at the time of the murder (Connery, 1977).
The third accused murderer, Tom Sawyer, succeeded in having his confession excluded from
evidence in pre-trial motions. The confession was suppressed when a judge ruled that it
had been produced through the use of coercion.6
Because their confessions seemed so damning, neither Mr. Abney nor Mr. Sawyer was able
to obtain bail. George Abney spent eleven months in jail awaiting trial. Tom Sawyer spent
fourteen months in jail before being able to obtain bail.
The only evidence against Russell Weaver, the accused thief, was his confession. It was
coerced during an interrogation conducted by a private investigator hired by Mr. Weaver‟s
employer. The investigator was brought in to interrogate store employees about a
supposed theft of several thousands of dollars of merchandise. During the month prior to
the interrogation Mr. Weaver had been attempting to unionize his fellow employees. Mr.
Weaver was singled out during the interrogation program and was pressured into admitting
that he stole from the store. He was promptly fired. Mr. Weaver‟s employer never filed a
police report or an insurance claim over the theft. There is no evidence suggesting that a
crime actually occurred. The jury that heard Mr. Weaver‟s civil complaint about his
treatment apparently reached this conclusion and awarded him over $400,000 in damages.
Coerced Confessions:
The Logic of Seemingly Irrational Action
Richard Ofshe, Ph.D.
Department of Sociology
University of California
Berkeley, California
Abstract
Although a vital part of the criminal-justice system, interrogation procedures
employed by police seeking to extract confessions from suspects have been abused.
The case of Tom Sawyer is presented to illustrate how police can manipulate certain
vulnerable suspects into confessing to and even believing they have committed
crimes of which they have no memory and which evidence proves they could not
have committed. These unethically manipulative interrogation procedures can be
conceptualized as a form of thought reform.
In a recent landmark study, Bedau and Radelet (1987) identified 350 instances of
miscarriages of justice in which innocent persons were convicted of capital crimes in
America. In 49 of these cases, the cause of the miscarriage was a false confession elicited
in response to coercion.1
This paper will present a brief summary report of a portion of a study2 of four instances in
which false confessions3 to criminal acts were elicited from innocent individuals.4 The
crimes to which these individuals confessed included one substantial theft and three
exceptionally brutal murders. In all four instances, the confession was the only evidence
linking the suspect to the crime.5
Two of the accused murderers, George Abney and Peter Reilly, were subjected to trial. Mr.
Abney was acquitted. Mr. Reilly was found guilty. The Reilly verdict was overturned when it
was discovered that the prosecutor had suppressed evidence proving Mr. Reilly to have
been somewhere else at the time of the murder (Connery, 1977).
The third accused murderer, Tom Sawyer, succeeded in having his confession excluded from
evidence in pre-trial motions. The confession was suppressed when a judge ruled that it
had been produced through the use of coercion.6
Because their confessions seemed so damning, neither Mr. Abney nor Mr. Sawyer was able
to obtain bail. George Abney spent eleven months in jail awaiting trial. Tom Sawyer spent
fourteen months in jail before being able to obtain bail.
The only evidence against Russell Weaver, the accused thief, was his confession. It was
coerced during an interrogation conducted by a private investigator hired by Mr. Weaver‟s
employer. The investigator was brought in to interrogate store employees about a
supposed theft of several thousands of dollars of merchandise. During the month prior to
the interrogation Mr. Weaver had been attempting to unionize his fellow employees. Mr.
Weaver was singled out during the interrogation program and was pressured into admitting
that he stole from the store. He was promptly fired. Mr. Weaver‟s employer never filed a
police report or an insurance claim over the theft. There is no evidence suggesting that a
crime actually occurred. The jury that heard Mr. Weaver‟s civil complaint about his
treatment apparently reached this conclusion and awarded him over $400,000 in damages.
