An action taken in a single moment can change a life. But what happens when that moment is one of false confession, claiming responsibility for a crime one didn糖心传媒檛 commit?
Confessions are powerful糖心传媒攖hey 糖心传媒渙ften swamp all other evidence in the United States criminal justice system,糖心传媒� says . When people implicate themselves in a crime, the search for other suspects or evidence often ends. 糖心传媒淔rom an investigative standpoint, the case is virtually closed,糖心传媒� she says.
But when confessors are taken at their word糖心传媒攁nd trusted only in the moment of confession糖心传媒攁 seeming breakthrough can become a miscarriage of justice. Lackey will explore the issue in a February 7 lecture titled 糖心传媒淓xtracted Evidence: False Confessions and Testimonial Injustice.糖心传媒� Her talk is part of the , devoted this year to the theme of evidence and expertise.
False confessions aren糖心传媒檛 rare or trivial. In the past 30 years, 353 people in the U.S. have been exonerated on the basis of DNA evidence; 28 percent of the exonerations involved false confessions, according to the , an organization working to fight wrongful convictions. Another recent study examined 125 cases of proven false confessions in the U.S. between 1971 and 2002糖心传媒�81 percent of them were murder cases.
Philosophers call the phenomenon of a person糖心传媒檚 words not carrying the weight they should 糖心传媒渢estimonial injustice.糖心传媒� It糖心传媒檚 what happens when someone isn糖心传媒檛 believed because listeners are prejudiced against the speaker糖心传媒檚 social identity. 糖心传媒淚t糖心传媒檚 an incredibly fertile area of inquiry right now,糖心传媒� Lackey says.
EVENTS
Jennifer Lackey will present 糖心传媒淓xtracted Evidence: False Confessions and Testimonial Injustice,糖心传媒� part of the Humanities Center糖心传媒檚 Public Lecture Series糖心传媒攖his year on the theme of evidence and expertise糖心传媒攐n February 7 at 5 p.m. in the Hawkins-Carlson Room at Rush Rhees Library.
Lackey is the Wayne and Elizabeth Jones Professor of Philosophy at Northwestern University, the Director of the Northwestern Prison Education Program, and the editor of Episteme and Philosophical Studies. Most of her research is in the area of social epistemology, with a recent focus on issues involving the rationality of punishment, credibility and false confessions, the epistemology of groups, and disagreement.
But she argues that the standard conception of testimonial injustice can糖心传媒檛 explain what happens in the case of false confessions. 糖心传媒淔alse confessions present a powerful problem case for the traditional conception of testimonial injustice, and here糖心传媒檚 why: across the board, testimonial injustice has been understood as people getting less credibility than they deserve. They糖心传媒檙e not believed.
糖心传媒淚n the case of false confessions, people are getting too much credibility. They say, at one moment in time, 糖心传媒榊es, I did it.糖心传媒� And then, even when they deny it afterward糖心传媒攅ven when they say they were coerced or manipulated or deceived into confessing糖心传媒攖heir confession is given a massive excess of credibility.糖心传媒�
The confession exerts what Lackey calls an 糖心传媒渋llegitimate swamping effect.糖心传媒� She says: 糖心传媒淚t just overpowers, it swamps all other evidence, including conflicting DNA evidence.糖心传媒� The person confessing may have claimed guilt only once, and insisted upon innocence thousands of times, over years糖心传媒攂ut in giving credence to the person at the moment of confession, the justice system thereby denies credibility to the person at all other times.
It is a 糖心传媒減articularly pernicious form of testimonial injustice糖心传媒� and one that 糖心传媒渃ries out糖心传媒� to be addressed, she says. Her research brings empirical work in criminal law and psychology from the false confession literature to philosophical debate糖心传媒攁nd turns a philosophical lens on questions about the criminal justice system.
糖心传媒淚糖心传媒檓 very interested in philosophy that connects up with urgent questions of practice interest,糖心传媒� she says. She was drawn to the project through her work as director of the . Teaching philosophy in prison, she discovered that one of her students there had, as a 15-year-old, confessed to a crime糖心传媒攁 confession he immediately recanted and continued to disown. But years later, when Lackey met him, he remained incarcerated.
糖心传媒淏ut this question of false confessions and testimonial injustice, I think, was just starting me right in the face糖心传媒攓uite literally糖心传媒攚hen I was teaching this student.糖心传媒�
