Tabel of content
PART I. SKETCHING THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN PSYCHOLOGY AND LAW.........................................4
I . 1 Introducing legal psychology history and origins.................................................................4
I . 1 Introducing legal psychology different types of psychology.................................................5
I . 1 Introducing legal psychology different legal systems...........................................................5
I . 1 Introducing legal psychology impetus worldwide................................................................6
I . 2 Legal psychology main aims.................................................................................................6
I . 2 Legal psychology scope........................................................................................................6
I . 2 Legal psychology nature of academic research....................................................................7
PART II. THE BIGGER PICTURE: THE IMPORTANCE OF FINDING AND APPLYING BEST PRACTICES. .7
II.1. Miscarriages of justice: concept (I).......................................................................................7
II.1. Miscarriages of justice: prevalence worldwide....................................................................8
II.1. Miscarriages of justice: causes.............................................................................................8
1) Eyewitness misidentification (Causes)................................................................................9
2) misapplication of forensic science (Causes)........................................................................9
3) governmental misconduct (Causes)..................................................................................10
4) dishonest informants (Causes)..........................................................................................10
5) bad lawyering (Causes).....................................................................................................11
6) false confessions (Causes).................................................................................................11
II.1. Miscarriages of justice: prevention and rectification.........................................................13
II.2. Safeguarding procedural rights of persons involved..........................................................14
PART III. OBTAINING INFORMATION FROM SUSPECTS, WITNESSES AND VICTIMS.......................15
III.1. Investigative interviewing of suspects, witnesses and victims..........................................15
III.1.1. Accusatorial vs. information gathering interview methods........................................15
III 1.2. The origins and rationale of investigative interviewing..............................................15
III 1.3 The UN on Effective Interviewing for Investigations and Information Gathering
Principles...............................................................................................................................16
III 1.4 The importance of investigative interviewing.............................................................17
III. 2. Researching scenarios and the importance of alibis........................................................17
III 2.1. Alternative scenarios..................................................................................................17
III 2.2. The suspect’s alibi as a starting point for an alternative scenario..............................17
III 2.3. Assessing alibi believability........................................................................................18
,III.3. Suspect vulnerability.............................................................................................................24
III.3.1. Vulnerability: what’s in a name?....................................................................................24
III.3.1.1. Vulnerability within case law of the ECtHR.............................................................24
III.3.1.2. Vulnerability within legal instruments of the EU.....................................................24
III.3.1.3. Vulnerability in academic research.........................................................................25
III.3.1.4. Some reflections on the attention given to vulnerability........................................26
III.3.2. Theorizing and conceptualizing suspect vulnerability....................................................27
III.3.3. Special provisions to compensate for suspect vulnerability...........................................31
III.3.4. Challenges in identifying vulnerability...........................................................................32
III.4. In search for the truth: lie detection techniques...............................................................34
III 4 1 Concept.......................................................................................................................34
III 4 2 The polygraph general principles................................................................................35
III 4 2 The polygraph question techniques............................................................................35
III 4 2 The polygraph the accuracy of polygraph testing........................................................36
III 4 2 The polygraph controversiality and criticism...............................................................37
III 4 2 The polygraph illustration Belgium..............................................................................39
III 4 3 Verbal credibility assessment techniques : different methods....................................40
III 4 3 Verbal credibility assessment techniques : accuracy...................................................41
III 4 3 Verbal credibility assessment techniques : future avenues.........................................41
III.5. Identifying perpetrators: eyewitness identification..........................................................42
III.5.1. Identity parades / lineup procedures.........................................................................42
III.5.2. Different type of procedures......................................................................................43
III.5.3. Variables to be considered for assessing lineup quality: estimator variables............45
III.5.3. Variables to be considered for assessing lineup quality: system variables.................49
III.5.3. Variables to be considered for assessing lineup quality: confidence and post-
identification feedback.........................................................................................................51
In conclusion.........................................................................................................................52
PART IV. UNDERSTANDING AND MITIGATING INVESTIGATIVE BIASES.........................................52
IV.1. Common pitfalls in decision making in criminal proceedings............................................52
IV.2. The role of forensic expert witnesses: added value..........................................................55
IV.2. The role of forensic expert witnesses: bias in expert decision making.............................56
IV.2.3. Overcoming bad expertise and bias...............................................................................59
IV.3. The importance and adequacy of procedural safeguards and legal provisions:
strengthening procedural safeguards across the EU.................................................................60
, IV.3. The importance and adequacy of procedural safeguards and legal provisions: the
adequate implementation as a pitfall – 3 examples..............................................................60
PART V. FUTURE AVENUES FOR IMPROVING LAW ENFORCEMENT PRACTICE AND JUDICIAL
DECISIONMAKING.........................................................................................................................62
V.1. The importance of cross-fertilization between psychology and law..................................62
V.2. The need for improved training informed by best practices..............................................63
V.2.1. Illustration: SUPRALAT training for criminal defence lawyers.....................................63
V.2.2. Investigative interviewing training for law enforcement practitioners.......................64
V.3. Improving judicial decision-making....................................................................................66
V.3.1. The quality of the case file..........................................................................................66
V.3.2. Judges’ assessment of the validity of statements.......................................................67
V.4. Changing beliefs and attitudes, changing practices.......................................................68
,Psychology, law and criminal
justice
Reader belangrijke teksten, te studeren (!!!):
- United Nations: principles of investigative interviewing
PART I. SKETCHING THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN
PSYCHOLOGY AND LAW
I . 1 Introducing legal psychology history and origins
Psychologie bestaat al voor een heel lange tijd, in verschillende vormen. Velen zullen in eerste
opzicht denken aan klinische psychologie. Deze cursus gaat zich focussen op rechtspsychologie.
Not new: end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th Century
German roots
Grondlegger = William Stern
o Hij is gevlucht van Duitsland naar de US, omdat hij Joods was. Daar
begon hij zich te focussen op de herinneringen van ooggetuigen, en
stelde vast dat deze herinnering geen vast patroon aannemen,
integendeel doorheen de tijd kunnen veranderen in details.
o Hij werd gevraagd als een expert in de rechtbank om bepaalde cases
vorm te geven in het proces. Hij was heel belangrijk voor de
ontwikkeling van caselaw in Duitsland.
Hugo Münsterberg
o Hij probeerde te claimen in de US dat HIJ de grondlegger was van legal
psychology. Ze leefde in dezelfde periode, en ook hij was een
academicus. Hij ontdekte ook dingen die van grote invloed zijn geweest
binnen de rechtspsychology, maar zijn bevindingen rustte niet (zoals die
van Stern) op valideerbaar en betrouwbaar onderzoek. Hij was niet
eerlijk van waar hij zijn kennis vandaan haalde.
o “He did some damage to the relationship between psychology and
law”. Hij was heel negatief t.g.o. psychologie in combinatie met
rechtsgeleerden.
Focus on the fallibility of witness memory and testimony
Later on important developments in the Netherlands too (and worldwide). Willem
Albert Wagenaar, Hans Krombach en Peter van Koppen zij hebben ook veel invloed
gehad in NL voor wat betreft legal psychology.
,I . 1 Introducing legal psychology different types of psychology
In particular distinction between two disciplines:
- Forensic psychology
- Legal psychology
- (Criminological psychology)
Legal Psychology Forensic psychology
Roots in knowledge on perception, memory Roots in clinical psychology on deviant
and decision making behaviour of others (why do people commit
crimes?)
Focus more on group level
= het bestuderen van menselijke processen
in het algemeen
Bv. waarom gaan mensen zich zo gedragen? Waarom zouden
mensen bekennen voor iets wat ze niet hebben gedaan?
Welke factoren kunnen bijdragen tot het vals bekennen?
Mostly grounded in empirical research No emphasis on empirical research
Emphasis on experimental research Focus on (applying expertise to) individual
cases
Bv. iemand heeft een moord gepleegd en die persoon lijdt
aan een mentale ziekte, dan gaat men proberen nagaan in
welke mate deze ziekte van invloed is geweest op de
criminele daad
All parties involved, inc. law enforcement Focus on offenders and victims
and judicial authorities (= broughter scoop)
Deze lessen gaan zich focussen op legal psychology, maar de lijn tussen legal psychology en
psychology in het algemeen is niet zo strikt. Je moet uiteraard soms achtergrond hebben uit de
algemene psychologie om iets uit de rechtspsychologie te kunnen begrijpen.
I . 1 Introducing legal psychology different legal systems
1) Adversarial legal system
Het meeste onderzoek dat is gevonden binnen de rechtspsychology is gericht op het adversarial
karakter. De vraag is daarom: kunnen deze bevindingen ook doorgetrokken worden naar het
Inquisitorial systeem? Zo ja, hoe?
Typically within common law traditions (AngloSaxon criminal justice systems)
State vs. active and autonomous suspect/defendant/accused
o Men mag actief deelnemen aan het proces en zelf bewijsmateriaal
verzamelen onder leiding van je advocaat. Je moet dus je eigen dossier
maken en op het einde een rechter overtuigen van jouw
waarheidsvindingen, ipv deze afkomstig van de staat.
Court as impartial arbiter: emphasis on debate in court
, 2) Inquisitorial legal system
Typically within civil law traditions (e.g., Belgium, France, the Netherlands)
Judicial authorities and court actively involved in the investigation of the crime
Rather passive role for the suspect
Emphasis on pre-trial investigation
convergence of adversarialism and inquisitorialism
Mixure of both systems worldwide
Increasing importance of findings from Anglo-Saxon countries from continental
countries
I . 1 Introducing legal psychology impetus worldwide
Academic scholarship
The occurrence of miscarriages of justice
Exponential growth over the past few decades
However, in Belgium…
o Legal psychological knowledge hardly implemented in practice
o Legal psychological knowledge hardly used to re/inform criminal
proceedings
I . 2 Legal psychology main aims
Studying human processes of all kind
o (Actual) behaviour under “control” of the law Influences (which and how)
o Mainly focus on flaws in legal evidence (things that go wrong) and decision
making aims to inform how our procedures operate and how to optimise
these procedures
Goals
o Informing criminal justice procedures and decisions
o To achieve best practices
Can and does (sometimes) lead to a “clash” between psychology and law
o Descriptive (data) vs. prescriptive (rulings) character
o Uncertainty (probabilities) vs. certainty & clarity
o General/group focus vs. individual cases
I . 2 Legal psychology scope
Broad
Mostly criminal proceedings in its entirety
o Evidence gathering
PART I. SKETCHING THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN PSYCHOLOGY AND LAW.........................................4
I . 1 Introducing legal psychology history and origins.................................................................4
I . 1 Introducing legal psychology different types of psychology.................................................5
I . 1 Introducing legal psychology different legal systems...........................................................5
I . 1 Introducing legal psychology impetus worldwide................................................................6
I . 2 Legal psychology main aims.................................................................................................6
I . 2 Legal psychology scope........................................................................................................6
I . 2 Legal psychology nature of academic research....................................................................7
PART II. THE BIGGER PICTURE: THE IMPORTANCE OF FINDING AND APPLYING BEST PRACTICES. .7
II.1. Miscarriages of justice: concept (I).......................................................................................7
II.1. Miscarriages of justice: prevalence worldwide....................................................................8
II.1. Miscarriages of justice: causes.............................................................................................8
1) Eyewitness misidentification (Causes)................................................................................9
2) misapplication of forensic science (Causes)........................................................................9
3) governmental misconduct (Causes)..................................................................................10
4) dishonest informants (Causes)..........................................................................................10
5) bad lawyering (Causes).....................................................................................................11
6) false confessions (Causes).................................................................................................11
II.1. Miscarriages of justice: prevention and rectification.........................................................13
II.2. Safeguarding procedural rights of persons involved..........................................................14
PART III. OBTAINING INFORMATION FROM SUSPECTS, WITNESSES AND VICTIMS.......................15
III.1. Investigative interviewing of suspects, witnesses and victims..........................................15
III.1.1. Accusatorial vs. information gathering interview methods........................................15
III 1.2. The origins and rationale of investigative interviewing..............................................15
III 1.3 The UN on Effective Interviewing for Investigations and Information Gathering
Principles...............................................................................................................................16
III 1.4 The importance of investigative interviewing.............................................................17
III. 2. Researching scenarios and the importance of alibis........................................................17
III 2.1. Alternative scenarios..................................................................................................17
III 2.2. The suspect’s alibi as a starting point for an alternative scenario..............................17
III 2.3. Assessing alibi believability........................................................................................18
,III.3. Suspect vulnerability.............................................................................................................24
III.3.1. Vulnerability: what’s in a name?....................................................................................24
III.3.1.1. Vulnerability within case law of the ECtHR.............................................................24
III.3.1.2. Vulnerability within legal instruments of the EU.....................................................24
III.3.1.3. Vulnerability in academic research.........................................................................25
III.3.1.4. Some reflections on the attention given to vulnerability........................................26
III.3.2. Theorizing and conceptualizing suspect vulnerability....................................................27
III.3.3. Special provisions to compensate for suspect vulnerability...........................................31
III.3.4. Challenges in identifying vulnerability...........................................................................32
III.4. In search for the truth: lie detection techniques...............................................................34
III 4 1 Concept.......................................................................................................................34
III 4 2 The polygraph general principles................................................................................35
III 4 2 The polygraph question techniques............................................................................35
III 4 2 The polygraph the accuracy of polygraph testing........................................................36
III 4 2 The polygraph controversiality and criticism...............................................................37
III 4 2 The polygraph illustration Belgium..............................................................................39
III 4 3 Verbal credibility assessment techniques : different methods....................................40
III 4 3 Verbal credibility assessment techniques : accuracy...................................................41
III 4 3 Verbal credibility assessment techniques : future avenues.........................................41
III.5. Identifying perpetrators: eyewitness identification..........................................................42
III.5.1. Identity parades / lineup procedures.........................................................................42
III.5.2. Different type of procedures......................................................................................43
III.5.3. Variables to be considered for assessing lineup quality: estimator variables............45
III.5.3. Variables to be considered for assessing lineup quality: system variables.................49
III.5.3. Variables to be considered for assessing lineup quality: confidence and post-
identification feedback.........................................................................................................51
In conclusion.........................................................................................................................52
PART IV. UNDERSTANDING AND MITIGATING INVESTIGATIVE BIASES.........................................52
IV.1. Common pitfalls in decision making in criminal proceedings............................................52
IV.2. The role of forensic expert witnesses: added value..........................................................55
IV.2. The role of forensic expert witnesses: bias in expert decision making.............................56
IV.2.3. Overcoming bad expertise and bias...............................................................................59
IV.3. The importance and adequacy of procedural safeguards and legal provisions:
strengthening procedural safeguards across the EU.................................................................60
, IV.3. The importance and adequacy of procedural safeguards and legal provisions: the
adequate implementation as a pitfall – 3 examples..............................................................60
PART V. FUTURE AVENUES FOR IMPROVING LAW ENFORCEMENT PRACTICE AND JUDICIAL
DECISIONMAKING.........................................................................................................................62
V.1. The importance of cross-fertilization between psychology and law..................................62
V.2. The need for improved training informed by best practices..............................................63
V.2.1. Illustration: SUPRALAT training for criminal defence lawyers.....................................63
V.2.2. Investigative interviewing training for law enforcement practitioners.......................64
V.3. Improving judicial decision-making....................................................................................66
V.3.1. The quality of the case file..........................................................................................66
V.3.2. Judges’ assessment of the validity of statements.......................................................67
V.4. Changing beliefs and attitudes, changing practices.......................................................68
,Psychology, law and criminal
justice
Reader belangrijke teksten, te studeren (!!!):
- United Nations: principles of investigative interviewing
PART I. SKETCHING THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN
PSYCHOLOGY AND LAW
I . 1 Introducing legal psychology history and origins
Psychologie bestaat al voor een heel lange tijd, in verschillende vormen. Velen zullen in eerste
opzicht denken aan klinische psychologie. Deze cursus gaat zich focussen op rechtspsychologie.
Not new: end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th Century
German roots
Grondlegger = William Stern
o Hij is gevlucht van Duitsland naar de US, omdat hij Joods was. Daar
begon hij zich te focussen op de herinneringen van ooggetuigen, en
stelde vast dat deze herinnering geen vast patroon aannemen,
integendeel doorheen de tijd kunnen veranderen in details.
o Hij werd gevraagd als een expert in de rechtbank om bepaalde cases
vorm te geven in het proces. Hij was heel belangrijk voor de
ontwikkeling van caselaw in Duitsland.
Hugo Münsterberg
o Hij probeerde te claimen in de US dat HIJ de grondlegger was van legal
psychology. Ze leefde in dezelfde periode, en ook hij was een
academicus. Hij ontdekte ook dingen die van grote invloed zijn geweest
binnen de rechtspsychology, maar zijn bevindingen rustte niet (zoals die
van Stern) op valideerbaar en betrouwbaar onderzoek. Hij was niet
eerlijk van waar hij zijn kennis vandaan haalde.
o “He did some damage to the relationship between psychology and
law”. Hij was heel negatief t.g.o. psychologie in combinatie met
rechtsgeleerden.
Focus on the fallibility of witness memory and testimony
Later on important developments in the Netherlands too (and worldwide). Willem
Albert Wagenaar, Hans Krombach en Peter van Koppen zij hebben ook veel invloed
gehad in NL voor wat betreft legal psychology.
,I . 1 Introducing legal psychology different types of psychology
In particular distinction between two disciplines:
- Forensic psychology
- Legal psychology
- (Criminological psychology)
Legal Psychology Forensic psychology
Roots in knowledge on perception, memory Roots in clinical psychology on deviant
and decision making behaviour of others (why do people commit
crimes?)
Focus more on group level
= het bestuderen van menselijke processen
in het algemeen
Bv. waarom gaan mensen zich zo gedragen? Waarom zouden
mensen bekennen voor iets wat ze niet hebben gedaan?
Welke factoren kunnen bijdragen tot het vals bekennen?
Mostly grounded in empirical research No emphasis on empirical research
Emphasis on experimental research Focus on (applying expertise to) individual
cases
Bv. iemand heeft een moord gepleegd en die persoon lijdt
aan een mentale ziekte, dan gaat men proberen nagaan in
welke mate deze ziekte van invloed is geweest op de
criminele daad
All parties involved, inc. law enforcement Focus on offenders and victims
and judicial authorities (= broughter scoop)
Deze lessen gaan zich focussen op legal psychology, maar de lijn tussen legal psychology en
psychology in het algemeen is niet zo strikt. Je moet uiteraard soms achtergrond hebben uit de
algemene psychologie om iets uit de rechtspsychologie te kunnen begrijpen.
I . 1 Introducing legal psychology different legal systems
1) Adversarial legal system
Het meeste onderzoek dat is gevonden binnen de rechtspsychology is gericht op het adversarial
karakter. De vraag is daarom: kunnen deze bevindingen ook doorgetrokken worden naar het
Inquisitorial systeem? Zo ja, hoe?
Typically within common law traditions (AngloSaxon criminal justice systems)
State vs. active and autonomous suspect/defendant/accused
o Men mag actief deelnemen aan het proces en zelf bewijsmateriaal
verzamelen onder leiding van je advocaat. Je moet dus je eigen dossier
maken en op het einde een rechter overtuigen van jouw
waarheidsvindingen, ipv deze afkomstig van de staat.
Court as impartial arbiter: emphasis on debate in court
, 2) Inquisitorial legal system
Typically within civil law traditions (e.g., Belgium, France, the Netherlands)
Judicial authorities and court actively involved in the investigation of the crime
Rather passive role for the suspect
Emphasis on pre-trial investigation
convergence of adversarialism and inquisitorialism
Mixure of both systems worldwide
Increasing importance of findings from Anglo-Saxon countries from continental
countries
I . 1 Introducing legal psychology impetus worldwide
Academic scholarship
The occurrence of miscarriages of justice
Exponential growth over the past few decades
However, in Belgium…
o Legal psychological knowledge hardly implemented in practice
o Legal psychological knowledge hardly used to re/inform criminal
proceedings
I . 2 Legal psychology main aims
Studying human processes of all kind
o (Actual) behaviour under “control” of the law Influences (which and how)
o Mainly focus on flaws in legal evidence (things that go wrong) and decision
making aims to inform how our procedures operate and how to optimise
these procedures
Goals
o Informing criminal justice procedures and decisions
o To achieve best practices
Can and does (sometimes) lead to a “clash” between psychology and law
o Descriptive (data) vs. prescriptive (rulings) character
o Uncertainty (probabilities) vs. certainty & clarity
o General/group focus vs. individual cases
I . 2 Legal psychology scope
Broad
Mostly criminal proceedings in its entirety
o Evidence gathering
