Psychology
Testimony for Hire: Jailhouse Informants
Document Type
Poster Presentation
Location
Indianapolis, IN
Subject Area
Psychology
Start Date
13-4-2018 8:30 AM
End Date
13-4-2018 10:00 AM
Sponsor
Stacy Wetmore (Butler University)
Description
Since DNA testing became available in the late 1980’s, there have been approximately 285 DNA exonerations of wrongly conviction cases. The Innocence Project, which tracks these cases, lists the major contributing factors: eyewitness misidentification, faulty forensic science, false confessions, prosecutorial error, jailhouse informant testimony, and poor lawyering (Innocence Project, 2018). Because of the Innocence Project’s work identifying these leading causes social science researchers have set out to investigate these topics and have sought to make changes in many jurisdictions. There is one leading cause, however, in terms of progress in the realm of science and policy that has remained stagnant, and that is jailhouse informant testimony (Roth, 2016). Jailhouse informants, also commonly known as snitches, are the leading cause of wrongful conviction in capital cases (Warden, 2004). Given that jailhouse informants pose a significant risk, yet are identified as a necessary tool by law enforcement, more needs to be known about how and why the criminal justice system relies on this form of testimony. The current research evaluated 40 exoneration cases that utilized jailhouse informant testimony with the goal of identifying key features that that jurors may have relied upon. Using the framework of Truth Default Theory (Levine, 2014) we examined if the jailhouse informant reported facts consistent with the pattern presented by the prosecution, the reason they stated they were testifying, and whether an incentive for testimony was reported.
Testimony for Hire: Jailhouse Informants
Indianapolis, IN
Since DNA testing became available in the late 1980’s, there have been approximately 285 DNA exonerations of wrongly conviction cases. The Innocence Project, which tracks these cases, lists the major contributing factors: eyewitness misidentification, faulty forensic science, false confessions, prosecutorial error, jailhouse informant testimony, and poor lawyering (Innocence Project, 2018). Because of the Innocence Project’s work identifying these leading causes social science researchers have set out to investigate these topics and have sought to make changes in many jurisdictions. There is one leading cause, however, in terms of progress in the realm of science and policy that has remained stagnant, and that is jailhouse informant testimony (Roth, 2016). Jailhouse informants, also commonly known as snitches, are the leading cause of wrongful conviction in capital cases (Warden, 2004). Given that jailhouse informants pose a significant risk, yet are identified as a necessary tool by law enforcement, more needs to be known about how and why the criminal justice system relies on this form of testimony. The current research evaluated 40 exoneration cases that utilized jailhouse informant testimony with the goal of identifying key features that that jurors may have relied upon. Using the framework of Truth Default Theory (Levine, 2014) we examined if the jailhouse informant reported facts consistent with the pattern presented by the prosecution, the reason they stated they were testifying, and whether an incentive for testimony was reported.