Kids, Cops, and Confessions: Inside the Interrogation Room

5. Juveniles Respond to Interrogation: Outcomes and Consequences

141 CHAPTER FIVE Juveniles Respond to Interrogation Outcomes and Consequences This chapter examines how the 285 youths whom police questioned responded to their interrogators. Part I examines how they answered and how much information they provided. It analyzes their demeanor during questioning, how their attitude affected whether they cooperated or resisted, the evidentiary value of statements, and the length of interrogations . Part II focuses on how youths’ decisions to waive or invoke Miranda affected outcomes and sentences. The criminal and juvenile justice systems rely heavily on plea bargains, and youths’ admissions affect the balance of advantage between prosecutors and defense lawyers. The relationship between confessions and pleas highlights Packer’s Crime Control model of justice with one critical difference. Although police interrogation involves an informal, administrative inquiry, in Minnesota it is a proceeding “on the record.” Scales tapes enable prosecutors and defense lawyers to review and a judge at a suppression hearing to determine admissibility of a statement based on an objective record, rather than a swearing contest between police and youth. I. Juveniles’ Responses to Interrogation Chapter 4 examined how police questioned juveniles. Here, I assess how juveniles responded. First, I examine the forms of juveniles’ responses— whether they gave positive or negative answers, whether they gave justifications or rationalizations for their behavior, and whether they sought information from police. I examine whether an interview produced a confession, admission, or denial. I assess how youths’ attitudes influenced whether they confessed or denied and whether statements led police to new evidence—other offenders, witnesses, or physical evidence. Finally, I examine how long police questioned juveniles. One of the most important findings of this study is how brief routine felony interrogations are. I examine why police concluded most interrogations so quickly and identify factors associated with longer questioning. A. Form of Responses Juveniles responded to officers’ questions in different ways. They did not give a single type of response, and their answers varied during an interview . I coded responses into five categories: short positive, extended 142 Juveniles Respond to Interrogation positive, negative, rationalizing involvement, and seeking information.1 The categories subsume both the length and content of responses. A juvenile ’s short positive response was agreeing with a question or making a brief factual statements. An extended positive response was a narrative that contained a juvenile’s version of events—that is, they told their story —if the response was three sentences or longer. A rationalization could be contained in either a short or long response in which a juvenile provided an explanation or justification, minimized his or her role, minimized the seriousness of the offense, or apportioned responsibility to other parties. Juveniles’ negative responses—short or extended—included denials, rejection of assertions, inability to remember, or claim of lack of knowledge. Finally, juveniles sought information from police about details of the investigation or what would happen to them. Table 5.1 reports that in nearly every case (97.2%), juveniles gave at least some short positive responses to questions. They provided brief accounts or explanations or agreed with officers’ assertions or statements. Short responses may or may not have contained incriminating admissions. In about two-thirds (65.6%) of cases, juveniles told their story or gave a version of events that rationalized or excused the crime or adopted themes suggested by interrogators. In such instances, juveniles minimized their role, offered a reason for their actions, played down the seriousness of the offense, blamed the victim, or decided to “do their time” without implicating others. Nearly two-thirds (64.6%) of juveniles gave extended narratives. An extended narrative often contained a rationlization. In more than onethird of cases (37.2%), juveniles gave negative responses to some or all the questions. Negative responses took several forms: disputing assertions, rejecting inferences, denying involvement, denying knowledge, being unable to remember, or selectively refusing to answer. Juveniles sought information from police in less than one-quarter of cases (22.8%). They asked about facts gleaned during the investigation, the likely disposition Table 5.1 Form of Juveniles’ Responses Response N % Short positive 277 97.2 Rationalization 187 65.6 Extended positive 184 64.6 Negative—denial 106 37.2 Seeking information 65 22.8 143 Juveniles Respond to Interrogation of their case, or the likelihood of release from custody. Different forms of responses were not mutually exclusive, and juveniles made several types during an interview. Short positive. Juveniles gave several different types of...