Why Do Wrongful Convictions Happen?

By studying cases where individuals have been exonerated, we have been able to identify the main factors that contribute to wrongful convictions. At KWIP, we see these factors—often in combination—in the many applications that arrive in our mailbox from incarcerated individuals seeking our help.Ìý

The leading factors in wrongful convictions are:

Eyewitness Misidentification

Eyewitness misidentification is one of the most common factors in cases of wrongful conviction. Nationally, 28% of all exonerations involveÌýmistaken eyewitness identification.

Social science research demonstrates that human memory is highly imperfect andÌýfragile. When people experience a stressful event like a crime, they are much less able to makeÌýan accurate identification. Witnesses are even less accurate when they attempt to identify someone of another race. Additionally, lineups and photo arrays can be suggestive and lead a witness to pick the wrong person. This can happen when theÌýsuspect is the only person in an array who closely matchesÌýthe description of the offender. Police officers can also influence the process by how they interact with a witness during the identification procedure. A police officer's comments, body language, andÌýpositive feedback can steer the witness towards a particular suspect and thenÌýinflate the witness's confidence in their identification.

Despite study after study proving the unreliability of eyewitness identification, it is extremely persuasive evidence. When a crime victim points to the defendant in the courtroomÌýand says with certainty, "That is the person who did this to me," juries are unlikely to reject that testimony.

Kirk Bloodsworth (Maryland): ÌýKirk Bloodworth, a former Marine, was convicted of the 1984 rape and murder of a nine-year-old girlÌýin Maryland. At the time of trial, the case against Bloodworth seemed overwhelming, and the jury sentenced him to death. Five eyewitnesses all testified that they sawÌýBloodsworth with the victim around the time of herÌýdisappearance. Eight years later, DNA evidence proved that all five eyewitnesses were wrong. DNA testing of the victim's underwear and clothingÌýshowed that another man, Kimberly Shaw Ruffner, was the real perpetrator.

Ìý

False Confessions

False confessions have been a factor inÌý12% of proven wrongful convictions nationwide. While it may seem difficult to understand why someone would confess to a crime they did not commit, there are many reasons that this can happen. For instance, physical intimidation or threats of violenceÌýby law enforcement can lead a suspectÌýto falsely confess. Common interrogation techniques can also be psychologically coercive. For example, police are allowed toÌýlie about the evidence and make a suspect believe that forensic testing or other conclusive evidence has already proven their guilt, even when this is not true.ÌýPolice might also provide false assurances thatÌýthings will go better -- and a long interrogation will finally cease -- only if the person confesses.ÌýThe truth is that many people break under this pressure, especially when the interrogation is lengthy or when they've been deprived of food, water, and/or sleep. Young people and people with intellectual disabilities are especially vulnerable to giving a false confession.

Lorenzo Montoya (Colorado): ÌýLorenzo Montoya was wrongfully convicted in 2000 for participating in the robbery and murder of aÌýspecial education teacher. ÌýThough he was just 14 years old, he was tried as an adult andÌýsentenced toÌýlife in prison without the possibility of parole. His conviction rested in part on a false confession. HisÌýmother was present during the first 40 minutes of the police interrogation.ÌýAfter she left, detectives aggressively interrogated MontoyaÌýby shouting, pounding on the table, and telling him that he was going to be sentenced to lifeÌýwithout parole. Despite denying his involvement in the murder over 60 times, Montoya finally gave in to the pressure and falsely confessed. There were, however, clear factual errors in his confession. When police pressed Montoya, he fixed the errors in his statement so that it squared with the official narrative of the crime. ÌýAfter serving 14 years in prison, Montoya was exonerated by DNA.


Ìý

Police and Prosecutorial Misconduct

Ìý

Official misconduct by police officers, prosecutors, or other government officialsÌýhas been present in 54% of wrongful convictions across the nation.Ìý Because criminal cases have many different stages, official misconduct can occurÌýin numerous ways. At the investigation stage, police engage in misconduct when they deliberately use suggestion in an identification procedure, coerce a witnessÌýto implicate a suspect, fabricateÌýphysical evidence, or use improper interrogation techniques to secure a confession.ÌýAt the trial stage, prosecutors corrupt the process when they conceal exculpatory evidence (i.e.,Ìýevidence favorable to the defendant) or when they introduce false or perjured testimony.Ìý

Timothy Masters (Colorado): ÌýIn 1999, Timothy Masters was tried and convicted of a brutal murder that had taken place twelve years earlier. The female victim was stabbed in the back and sexually mutilated. At trial, the prosecution's case rested heavily on the testimony of a psychologist, J. Reid Meloy,Ìýwho examined writings and drawings created by Masters as a teenager following the death of his mother. The psychologist insisted that this material reflected a displaced anger towards women and directly implicated Masters in the crime. What Masters did not know at trial -- because the prosecution concealed the evidence -- is that police had consulted with two other experts who forcefully disagreed with Dr. Meloy's conclusions. Prosecutors also suppressed evidence about an alternate suspect who had a history of sexual deviancy, lived 100 yards from the murder scene, and committed suicide following his arrest for a separate sex crime. Unable to defend himself with this exculpatory evidence, Masters was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. He served nine years in prison before he was exonerated by DNA.

False and/or Misleading Forensic Evidence

False or misleading forensic evidence has been a contributing factor in 24% of exoneration cases across the country. Most forensic disciplines were developed within law enforcement and have not been subject to the kind of rigorous testingÌýnormallyÌýconducted to validate a scientific theory. As the forensic sciences have come under greater scrutiny, some disciplines -- including bitemark analysis and microscopic hair comparison -- have been exposed as nothing more than junk science. Even in more reliable disciplines, experts often overstateÌýtheir results and failÌýto acknowledge the limitations or error rate of a particularÌýforensic technique. Finally, like everyone, forensic practitioners can make mistakes, including mixing up samples or contaminating specimens. In some cases, forensic analysts have fabricated results, hidden exculpatory evidence, or reported results when testing had not been conducted.

Krystal Voss (Colorado): ÌýIn 2004, Krystal Voss was convicted of child abuse resulting in death after her 17-month-old son, Kyran, died from a head injury. From the beginning, both Voss and the child's babysitter told the same story: Kyran fell backwards off the babysitter's shoulders and hit the frozen ground on his head. Medical personnel at the hospital rushed to the conclusion that Kyran was instead the victim of child abuse. Under aÌýtheory of Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS), prevalent at that time, violent shaking by an adult is the only explanation when a child, like Kyran,ÌýpresentsÌýwith a triad of symptoms:Ìýbrain swelling, brain hemorrhaging, and retinal hemorrhaging.ÌýProponents of SBS have also insistedÌýthat short falls cannot cause this constellation of symptoms. Voss was convicted under the SBS theory and was sentenced to 20 years in prison. In the appeals process, Voss's new attorney presented compelling new medical evidence demonstrating that (1) short falls can cause the triad of symptoms associated with SBS; and (2) Kyran had bruising on one side of his head consistent with a fall onto the frozen ground. Voss's conviction was overturned and she was released from prison after serving 13 years.

Witness Perjury

False accusation or perjury is the most common feature of wrongful convictions and has beenÌýa factor in 60% of documented exonerations. Most often, witnesses lie because they receive some benefit for testifying against the defendant. For example, a person in jail facing criminal charges can secure a favorable plea bargain, dismissal of their own charges, special privileges in jail, or even money by offering damning evidence against a fellow inmate. These benefits createÌýa strong incentive to lie. In many wrongful convictions, defendants were not given key information related to the credibility of the incentivized witnessesÌýwho testified against them, including the exact benefits received, the witness'sÌýhistory of cooperating in other cases, and the witness's criminal history.

DeShawn Jones (Colorado): ÌýIn 2011, a woman reported that she was sexually assaulted by two men. The woman was taken to a nearby hospital where a forensic medical exam was conducted. DNA testing of a vaginal swab from that exam identifiedÌýDeShawn Jones, and he was arrested. Though Jones told his lawyer that he and his uncle had hadÌýconsensual sex with the alleged victim in exchange for drugs, the lawyer failed to interview key witnesses or hire an investigator.ÌýFacing the prospect a long prison sentence, Jones decided to accept the state's offer to plead to a lesser charge and receive probation. But, his probation was revoked, and he landed in prison, when he refused to admit his guilt duringÌýmandatory sex offender treatment.ÌýÌýTwo years into his prison sentence, the alleged victim admitted that she had lied about the sexual assault. When interviewed by Jones' appellate attorney, she admitted to having consensual sex with Jones and his uncle. She fabricated the story of sexual assault because she had missed her curfew at the shelter where she was staying and did not want to be kicked out. Following a reinvestigation of the case, the district attorney's office concluded that Jones' conviction should be vacated.

Sources: