Supreme Court casts doubts on confessions

Justices set aside a man's robbery confession that came after prolonged questioning. A 1968 law says the statement can be used if it was made within six hours after arrest.

By David G. Savage
LA Times
April 7, 2009

Reporting from Washington — The Supreme Court refused Monday to permit prolonged, secret questioning of crime suspects, ruling that even voluntary confessions may not be used in a federal court if the defendant was held more than six hours before confessing.

Justice David H. Souter pointed to the surprising number of persons who have been shown to be innocent through DNA evidence but had confessed to a crime.

Police questioning "isolates and pressures the individual," he said, "and there is mounting empirical evidence that these pressures can induce a frighteningly high percentage of people to confess to crimes they never committed."

The 5-4 decision upheld a federal rule dating back to the 1940s that says crime suspects should be brought before a magistrate as soon as possible.

(More here.)