Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-11-20
Curb ON Confessions
Held 3d-Degree Cure
To the Editor Of The Star:

To the Editor OF The star:
Now that the excitement incident to
the third degree investigations has
somewhat subsidized, I venture to make
suggestion, looking to partial solu-
ton of the problem.
It is we'll known that third-degree
methods have been in vogue in this
country for many, many years, and
doubtless such methods will be con-
tinued in the future, in spite OF occa-
SIGNAL public indignation and tnVest-
CATION" My thought. submitted sim
ply for discussion. is that the problem
is not cured by these sporadic 1nveStl-
cations, and that the real cure lies In
some effective legislation curbing the
use of confessions.
True it is, Theoretically at least, the
Constitution ard laws protect defend
ant from giving evidence against him.
self and this wise provision enacted
into the Constitution and laws by our
forefathers extends to involuntary con-
fessions exacted from q person sus-
pected of crime. When the theory,
however, has been reduced to practlce,
1t is not found so effective, for IN prac-
tice the course usually followed Is 70
hale a man behind the bars, sun1ecI
ination. maltreat him If necessary, and
when he has been reduced to a state OF
subiection and obedience to the Will OF
his inuuiSitorS, new actors In the drama
are called in, who have not been par
ticinants in or witnesses OF the mai
treatment and third-degree metnooS
leading up to the confession. Inc
prisoner is then admoniShed TO tel ms
story, and the stenographer talth1ully
records the fact that the conleS sS,,S
is made freely and voluntarily. mus,
when the confession is offered In evl-
dence at the trial of the culprit, those
rendering the confession truthfully tes-
tifv that it was freely and voluntarily
made. Quite often the defendant VIII
denv that he made the confession. IN
this state of the case the court Will,
following a long line OF decisions, SUD
NIT the confession to the jury WIN tne
instruction that when there Is con-
fiict of evidence as to whether con-
fession is or Is not voluntary the CUES
ton will be left to the jury, and they
NAV reject the confession, II, upon the
whole evidence, they are satisfied 1t was
not the voluntary act OF the defend
ant" Thus it will be seen that the
confession does get to the jury ana
you cannot eradicate its impressions
on the mind of the jury by any amount
of instructions to disregard 1t, IL they
are satisfied 1t was not the voluntary
act of the defendant. theoretically,
| the prisoner has received all that the
| law allows him, but practically. the
confession has been used against him.
I recall case in my experience some
years ago where q colored woman
| charged with murder was taken to q
! local hospital suffering from hysterical
insanity. During lucid intervals she
was taken from the hospital to the jail,
where she was QuiZzed until she lapSeo
! into Inconsistencies and was then re-
turned to the hospital. This operation
was repeated four or five times during
/ the day During one OF her lucid IN
tervals a two-page document, an al
| legged confession, was dictated 10 q
stenographer in her presence. When
| the confession was offered in court
the Stenogrs pher testified that 1t was
| freely and voluntarily made, and, so 1ar
| as he was concerned, it was so MADE.
| An eminent alienist, in testifying as
| to the sanity or insanity OF the defend
ant, used this confession as basis FOR
his opinion and stated to the jury tnaC
| from his examination OF the facts ana
circumstances land from his reading
| of the confession" he was satisfied
| that the defendant, at the time OF the
commission of the alleged offense, was
! of sound mind, he assuming that she
voluntarily signed the confession. Thus,
we have the spectacle of an alienist
| testifying as to the sanity or insanity
Of the defendant at the time OF the
commission of the alleged offense, using
| the confession itself as some evidence
of the defendants sanity. merely
mention this as an extreme case.
While there is some justification for
allowing police officers to interrogate
those whom they apprehend as "sus-
poets" it would seem that a law should
be enacted which would put some EN-
cacy into the rule prohibiting the use
! of involuntary testimony against de-
PENDANT. For instance. the law OF evil
dence could be amended SO as to pro-
hibit the use of any alleged confession
made by q defendant who has been in
| terrogated out of the presence OF a
| friend or counsel. This last suggestion
| NAV be considered too radical. How
ever. I submit it for what it may be
| worth. G. c. SHINN.