There are many reasons why people who did not actually commit a crime might confess during questioning. Sometimes, police officers promise to extend leniency or support those who confess.
Other times, they fabricate evidence to convince a defendant that their conviction is inevitable and that confessing now could lead to lesser charges. Some people simply become scared or confused during police questioning, as officers may continue asking people the same questions over and over for hours.
In some cases, criminal defense attorneys assisting those who confessed while they were in state custody can suppress the confession. They can prevent the prosecutor from playing an audio recording of the confession or providing the courts with the transcript of the statements made by the defendant during questioning.
When is it feasible to suppress a confession while preparing for a criminal trial?
When officers violated a defendant’s rights
Evidence suppression or exclusion is often the result of misconduct by police officers. If law enforcement professionals violate an individual’s rights, evidence they obtain through that inappropriate behavior may not help during a resulting trial. Lying to a suspect in state custody is not grounds to suppress a confession, but ignoring their Miranda rights could be.
In some cases, police officers completely fail to provide the Miranda warning to an individual before questioning them while they are in state custody. In those cases, the defendant’s lawyer could assert that their confession occurred in no small part due to the lack of information about their right to remain silent and their right to have a lawyer present.
Even if a defendant heard the warning, police officers could still violate their rights during questioning. Ignoring when a person verbally invokes the right to remain silent by continuing to question them as potentially a violation of their rights.
Additionally, if police officers continue with questioning after a person in state custody has requested legal representation, that could also constitute a violation of their Miranda rights that could warrant evidence suppression prior to the trial. There are other, far less common scenarios that could also warrant the exclusion of a confession or any contradictory statements made during formal questioning by law enforcement professionals.
Reviewing the state’s evidence with a criminal defense attorney can help people understand their options. The suppression of a confession could result in the state dismissing charges or could pave the way for a successful defense strategy that leads to an acquittal.