Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

What Makes Criminal Suspects Give a False Confession?

By Liliana Segura, AlterNet. Posted October 2, 2007.


The confession makes a guilty verdict almost automatic. So why are many "suspects" making false confessions?
Advertisement

When 16-year old Kharey Wise entered the Central Park Police Precinct at 102nd St on April 20, 1989, he didn't realize what he was walking into. It was the day after one of the most grisly crimes in official New York memory-the brutal sexual assault of a woman who would become known as the Central Park Jogger-and Wise had been asked to come in along with other black and Latino youths who had allegedly been in the park the night before. Wise was taken to the scene of the crime and shown graphic pictures of the woman's injuries, which included a fractured skull. Eventually, his visit to the police station would lead to an interrogation and, after nine hours of questioning, a videotaped confession that was confusing, convoluted, and chilling.

"Oh man, blood was scattered all over the place. I couldn't look at it no more," Wise told his interrogators. "…We went to the park for trouble and got trouble, a lot of trouble. That's what they wanted and I guess that's what I wanted. When I was doing it, that's what I wanted too. I can't apologize because it's too late. Now we got to pay up for what we did."

The confession was as good as a conviction. By the time it was shown in court, the jury, the city, and the country were convinced Wise and his four co-defendants-who had also confessed-were guilty as sin. But at the trial a problem arose. Despite his taped confession, Kharey Wise now insisted he was innocent. His confession, he said, had been forced out of him by the police.

A few days after Thanksgiving 1990, a dramatic exchange took place on the stand between the prosecutor and Wise. The New York Times ran it:

"Did the police tell you to say, "It was my first rape?'" [prosecutor Elizabeth Lederer] said, her arms folded tightly around her waist.

"Yes," he said.

"Did they ever tell you to say you had never done it before and would never do it again?"

"Yes."

"Did they tell you to say, "We went to the park for trouble and that's what we got?"

"Yes," he said.

"Did the police make you say 'We got to pay for what we did?'"

"Yes."

"Did they make you demonstrate how she was beaten and raped?"

"Yes."

"How she was punched?"

"Probably."

With that answer, Ms. Lederer shot back: "The police never told you any of those things, did they?"

"I just wanted to go home," he replied.

The jury was not convinced. Unlike his co-defendants, Wise was sent to an adult prison, where he spent 11-and-a-half years behind bars. Then, in 2002, following a confession by another convict (and a conclusive DNA match), he and the other young men - now known as the Central Park Five - were exonerated

The exoneration was met with the outrage and skepticism of many who could not believe that a group of men who had given confessions could possibly have been innocent-exculpatory evidence be damned. As a reporter for the Village Voice wrote at the time: "the acceptance of their guilt appears so deeply embedded in the public consciousness that even Matias Reyes's confession and DNA match aren't enough to quell the murmuring of some pundits and naysayers." Not to mention the NYPD, which released a report denying any mistakes were made and proposing new theories as to how the teenagers had acted in concert with Reyes.

The Central Park Jogger case may have been exceptional in its notoriety-Donald Trump took out a full-page ad in the Times calling for the reinstatement of the state death penalty for the defendants-but its outcome was disturbingly revealing with regard to false confessions. In a court of law, whether written or captured on tape, defendant confessions are so damning, they can easily overpower any other evidence. According to a 1999 study on false confessions written by Richard P. Conti and published in the Journal of Credibility Assessment and Witness Psychology, "the introduction of a confession makes the other aspects of a trial in court superfluous."

For suspects who provide false confessions, this realization comes far too late.

But seriously, who gives a false confession?

As it turns out, plenty of people.

Criminal justice history is littered with tales of false confessions. Among the more sensational are the famous kidnapping and murder of aviator Charles Lindbergh's baby in 1932-which prompted more than 200 people to come forward and "confess" to the crime-and, a decade and a half later, the gruesome killing of a young actress who would be nicknamed the "Black Dahlia." Thirty people confessed to that murder.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: interrogation, police coercion, false confessions, psychology

Liliana Segura is a writer and activist living in New York, and a program associate at The Nation Institute.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
First...eliminate all the scum...on an equal opportunity basis
Posted by: ekipnrut on Oct 2, 2007 3:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The August 19 ,2007 What Happened in Norfolk NYT article provides some more info on the case.
Many false confessions obtained in the Reich can be attributed
to the following unfolding scenario which is by no means
restricted to Chicago.
Chi
It's funny...'negroid filth' -NOT Black- (Omar)...in some putrescent nefarious way allied with arrogant intransigent white vermin fascist-and almost certainly racist-'prosecutors', who won't admit that they obtained unjust wrongful convictions. BOTH MFs belong in hell...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

coerced confession
Posted by: COinms on Oct 2, 2007 4:02 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It happens. I have a friend, never in trouble in his life, at age 47 finds himself in prison in Illinois for allegedly molesting his 6 year old daughter. It 's a long story, but basically he went in to report that he felt his child was being abused (he is divorced, and his wife was living with another man -- the abuser) and the first time, the police told him to go away, they were busy. He comes back again, same thing. The third time, he shows up with his mother for support. The cops send her home, and start interrogating my friend. The little girl has genital herpes. (My friend, while on bail, voluntarily took several tests that proved he did not have it -- the live in boyfriend did not take the test.) They rewrote his statement in such a way that a lawyer could read guilt into it.
Why did my friend sign it? He has always trusted authority. He had grave misgivings but was tired and thougth the police were always on the side of right... oh yes, and they never told him he was a suspect till they arrested him.
So a law abiding, tax paying citizen now sits in prison for 6 years, his retired parents had to mortgage their house to get his bail, the judge gave the bulk of the 30,000.00 to the wife, and the little girl still has genital herpes, and my friend still does not. The police bullied and scared him, saying that if he took it court, they'd pursue the death penalty. Hmmmm... six years or death: you decide.

This was in the small town of Braidwood Illinois, and the police there are as crooked as a dogs leg. It was an election year, and the same tactics were tried in the Riley Fox case, which happened only about 5 miles away, in Wilmington.

It's easy to be 'tough' on crime when a child is involved; the problem is that the police were corrupt, the legal system doesn't care who is innocent, as long as politicians can be seen as tough on crime, and if the defendant has money, he can pretty much get off scott free.

My friend shouldn't have signed; it was the only thing they had to convict him. The little girls 'interview' was so patently scripted and prompted that it was a joke.

From my experience, most cops are worse than the people out on the street. Petty bullies who now have power and a badge and a gun. I live in Mississippi and see the 'law and order' christian types all the time, and most of them are walking around like banty roosters, all puffed up with self importance, when if they didn't have that job, would be lucky to be working at McDonalds.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: coerced confession Posted by: Iconoclast421
» RE: coerced confession Posted by: vertical
They lie.
Posted by: colinmeister on Oct 2, 2007 5:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lying to suspects is a tool used by the police to extract confessions. Lies can take the form of claiming to have evidence or witnesses which don't exist, or convincing suspects that they will be treated more leniently by the justice system if they confess.

The public should be made aware that the police use these tactics, and therefore should excersise the Miranda right to remain silent, unless they have a lawyer present. Of course, the genuinely innocent are more likely not to excersise their right to remain silent, since they wrongly believe that since they have done nothing wrong, they have no reason not to talk to the police.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: They lie. Posted by: donl51
» RE: They lie. Posted by: Krain61
Coercion of the innocent and prosecutorial abuse=a perversion of Justice..QED..!
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on Oct 2, 2007 5:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The threat by prosecutors and police acting as judges and the overwhelming threat of an enormous amount of even more serious charges is the most common reason many innocent individuals are Coerced into pleading guilty so as to avoid this piling on of charges and the overwhelming costs associated with mounting a viable defense against these charges and the possibility of avoiding conviction on even only one of these many..

It is a regular practice and constitutes "prosecutorial abuse" and a perversion of our Justice system such as it is..QED..!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bottom Line Philosophy
Posted by: packofwolves on Oct 2, 2007 6:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unfortunately, our country operates on the bottom-line philosophy for everything. As a society, we don't seem to care who gets hurt or how the bottom line is attained - the only important thing is reaching the bottom line whether the arrival is based on fact or fiction. How have we gotten ourselves into such a state? Our criminal justice system is the most barbaric within all of the industrialized countries of the world. We keep building bigger prisons and filling them up with the most vulnerable among us, the mentally ill or chemically dependent, the down-trodden and those who cannot afford fancy lawyers. And it doesn't matter if they are guilty or innocent as long as they are imprisoned for a crime that occurred. The real criminals (the health care industry, pharmaceutical companies, and those other corporations that rob us of our retirement and cheat us at every turn and beat us while we're down) walk away unscathed, with their fortunes, homes, cars, etc. in tact. What a shameful country we have become, where the famous and super rich are immune to the realities the rest of us face. How long do you think a society can survive with a system like this? If you should ever get called in to a police station, keep your mouth shut and demand an attorney no matter what they tell you. How awful to be so afraid in a democratic society where we are presumed innocent until proven guilty. And we berate other countries for their practices! No wonder we are so hated throughout the world. Nothing is worse than a hypocrite.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bottom Line Philosophy Posted by: donl51
Expeditive justice
Posted by: chomsky on Oct 2, 2007 6:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Cops are asked to catch a criminal; they are not asked to catch the criminal.
As time runs out and pressure mounts, anyone will do...
It's like sweeping the dust under the carpet; it's convenient.
And let's talk about the guilty plea...
Either you plead innocent, and you risk 20+ years.
Or you plead guilty, and will only get 5 years.
So, even if innocent, it's less risky to plead guilty!
I am sure it is very convenient to speedup trials.
That's a parody of justice!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: xpeditive justice Posted by: VZEQICVA
forced confessions and people with disabilities
Posted by: Thucy on Oct 2, 2007 7:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anyone interested in the topic of false confessions should read the work of Robert Perske. Perske is a retired minister who specializes in investigating cases of false confessions extracted from people with developmental disabilities (folks most often called "mentally retarded"). He says that police often latch onto such people as a way of "solving" all manner of unsolved crimes, and that developmentally disabled people are particularly vulnerable to the sorts of dishonest and manipulative techniques mentioned in this article.

His book "Unequal Justice" goes into a good deal of detail on a number of such cases, and anyone working in this field, or in criminal justice in general, should be aware of Perske's work.

Excellent article. Thanks Alternet for posting this.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Justice" system
Posted by: frank69 on Oct 2, 2007 7:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have never had a justice system in this country.
We have, and always have had, an adversarial system.
There's crime, and then there's heinous crime.
If you have lots of money, you never get the death penalty, and often get no jail time.
If you're poor, on the other hand, you will go to jail, and may well suffer the death penalty.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why, oh why...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Oct 2, 2007 9:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... do people not get this lesson? DON'T TRUST POLICE. Especially if they are in any way saying you did something. Once they think you did something they will say or do just about anything... or just anything.. to get you.. as they already view you as a criminal, so anything they do is in their minds justified because you are worthless scum. Justice? Yep.. that IS what most of them think they serve... even when they do everything they can to circumvent the system set up to maintain real justice.

Don't trust the police. It is as simple as that. They are not on your side.. they are on THEIR side. Its not about where they stand and where you stand.. its all about where they THINK you stand or want to think you stand.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Why, oh why... Posted by: donl51
» RE: Why, oh why... Posted by: mjwmac
Here's how it is:
Posted by: christastropher on Oct 2, 2007 10:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Innocent unitl proven guilty," honesty, the rules of evidence, and general humanity are not part of the police's game. Once you are in their hands they have decided that you are guilty, and as such will employ all manners of intimidation, deceit, and brain washing techniques to get you to confess.Here is an excellent overview of some of these techniques. The olny thing that you should say when in custody is "I will remain silent, I want to see an attorney." After this just keep your mouth shut no matter what.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» No joke. Posted by: JoshuaLudd
Here's How The Criminal Justice System Works As Told By A Serial Criminal
Posted by: MAD on Oct 2, 2007 10:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anyone who has ever had contact with the these living, breathing pieces of human excrement we call "law enforcement officers" knows that they fancy themselves a superior race, which is rather ironic considering the majority of them are only just barely functionally literate, put firecrackers up the asses of small rodents as children and killed Vietnamese or Iraqi children as young adults. After years on the protest trail, I know how these evil troglodyte MF'ers operate better than most.

Although I have never given a false confession, I have been coerced NUMEROUS times and beaten in interrogation rooms a la Vic Mackey. Now I just laugh in their faces and tell them to "fuck off" and "send in my attorney, pig". For people who don't know how it works, here's a starter kit:

1. They arrest you in the most humiliating, degrading and violent manner possible. That means getting in cheap shots like a few cracks upside the head, knees in the back and demeaning verbal abuse (often racial in nature), even if you surrender peacefully as I did. This is called "setting the tempo".

2. Next, they chat you up in the squad car as if they're now the most benign force in the universe (that just happened to kick you in the ribs minutes earlier). These stupid pieces of shit are the least sophisticated, most uneducated short yellow bus MF'ers you'll ever come across in your lives but that doesn't stop them from trying to *rolls eyes* outwit you and solicit some confession before they even book you down at the station.

3. What follows is a series of "wrinkles in time" wherein you simply disappear from sight for minutes or even hours at a time. By leaving you in limbo, they try to keep you guessing as to your actual status. Many actually crack at this point but I find the majority of people lose it right from the start. Getting cuffed and stuffed is traumatic shit for people who've never been down that road. I've seen hulking men break down and sob when the cuffs go on. Those who do break, generally speaking, are people who have made a mistake but lead otherwise normal lives - they just want it to be over. In order to end the sadistic cycle, many will give it up, no matter what "it" is.

4. If you don't crack, they'll simply throw you into a holding cell along with some hard, institutionalized MF'ers who will scare the shit out of 99% of human beings. For instance, I was told there was no room in a private cell so I would be bunking next to a man from Hawaii. No problem I thought. We'll talk about surfing. It turned out the guy was 6'6", 265 lbs of rippling, tatted muscle who admitted that he had just beaten and stabbed his (2) brothers-in-law to death a few days earlier, and I quote, had "nothing to lose at this point". After two nights of no sleep, I cracked and copped a plea. Strangely, others were coming in and getting cells to themselves.

5. Eventually, you get your day with the DA. He's is also a lying, scandalous piece of human filth who wants nothing more than to get your confession so as to avoid trial, assigning an expensive public defender or just doing any legal work of any kind. He lies his ass off and says things like "we'll go easier on you if you just fess up". He swears up and down that you'll only get community service and a few fines. He then encourages you to sign immediately as the deal is about to be taken off the table. You are not allowed to read the entire "deal" which is actually no deal at all but a confession admitting to the original charge. You may ask for an attorney, but strangely, the Public Defender is NEVER available or "it may be days before you can speak with him". He also threatens to delay your arraignment where bail is set, and before this became Weimar America, you could no longer be held provided you met bail. They can delay this process almost indefinitely.

Continued!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Use of Torture is Widepread
Posted by: sofla100 on Oct 2, 2007 4:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Also needing to be emphasized is the use of torture in many American Police Depts. This includes physical torture, to include beating suspects with belts or whips, denial of food or toilet facilities and threatening to arrest one's friends or family on fraudulent charges. If this does not work, confessions may also be coerced by the use of false or implanted evidence. This is easily done by claiming drugs or illegal guns are found on suspects. Then, telling the suspects to "fess up to avoid even more prison time, etc." Unfortunately, all these techniques, and more, are not uncommonly used in the USA today as part of standard police work.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't talk, Ask for a Lawyer!
Posted by: Jersey Devil on Oct 2, 2007 7:28 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The police will do anything to get a confession! You have rights and should not permit an interrogation without a lawyer being present to make sure the cops obey the law. This stuff on TV where suspects go one on one with a team of detectives is total fiction. Be calm, ask for a lawyer and tell them you will not answer any questions or engage in a conversation until you have a legal counsel - and make sure this is not an Asst. DA. If they don't get you a lawyer, keep asking for a lawyer. Your life and freedom are at stake, you need legal advice in order to adequately defend yourself. Your only hope is to have a lawyer, regardless of what your interrogators say!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You haven’t experienced the real America until you’ve been arrested
Posted by: Lector on Oct 2, 2007 11:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I suppose the psychology used in police interrogation tactics can be devastating if you haven’t at least a rudimentary knowledge on the subject to anticipate the routine; and even then it was scary enough finding yourself in a room with hostile or indifferent cops. After being pulled over for driving 60 in a 55 zone crossing the Arizona state line, I was cuffed, driven to the local jail, and interrogated but let go after a tense night of fun and games. Rather harsh treatment considering my “crime” and not a standard procedure, as far as I know. My advice: stay clear of the American police state if you can.

Robert Lightfoot

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The bureaucracy Game
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Oct 3, 2007 12:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are only 2 kinds of people who get their paychecks from governments.
They are politicians and bureaucrats. If you work for a government, you probably
don't realize that you are a bureaucrat. Most bureaucrats resist mightily the
appellation. The game in any bureaucracy is to "get this piece of paper off of my
desk and make sure it doesn't come back." It doesn't matter how you get this
piece of paper off of your desk, just so it doesn't come back.
The police are bureaucrats. Therefore, the police, like all bureaucrats, take the
easiest route to getting this piece of paper off of their desks. The prime suspects
are people who are already depressed, like family members of the victim. It is
easier to break somebody who is already broken.
The only solution I see is to do it like civilized countries do. Make confessions of
ANY type inadmissible. This should be added to the Bill of Rights. A
Constitutional Amendment is called for.

The entire legal system needs to be discarded and replaced with something
completely different. Our legal system is twice obsolete. Juries are left over
from the agrarian age. The system was obsolete in the industrial age. We are
now in the information age. Our legal system was once the newest but is now one
of the most obsolete. Adding computers to lawyers' desks no more updates the
system than adding a computer to a sailboat turns it into a spacecraft.
For crimes like running a red light, the city should be required to mount movie
cameras on the traffic lights. The camera can reliably show, frame by frame,
exactly when the light turned. Davenport, Iowa tried to do this for speeding, and
was shot down by people who wanted to be stopped by a cop! Or so they said.
Digital cameras are very small, getting cheaper, and are incorporated into cell
phones. Suppose cameras were incorporated into clothes or suppose that human
memory could be read out after death. Then any crime would be recorded from
the point of view of the victim. With cell phones, we seem to be headed toward
becoming the "Borg" as on Star Trek. All we have to do is implant the cell
phones in our heads. [We are the Americans. You will be Assimilated.
Resistance is futile.] If you had your cell phone implanted, could you transmit
your vision of your killer to the police?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Innocent 15-Year-Latino Honor Student Sentenced to Life in Prison
Posted by: TIME on Oct 3, 2007 5:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Liliana Segura:

I read your article "What Makes Criminal Suspects Give a False Confession?" which was recently featured on Alternet.org.

The article addressed a very important issue that is at the center of a number of wrongful convictions. Hopefully your writing motivates its readers to help combat this injustice and produce meaningful change in the system.

I know firsthand the value of educating society about the perils of allowing police to abuse their authority. During the same that the Central Park Jogger Case took place another Latino youth, a 15-year-old honor student named Efren Paredes, Jr., was going through court hearings in St. Joseph, Michigan for a crime he did not commit.

While Efren is innocent of the crime and gave no confession in the case, the Central Park Jogger case had ripple effects in courtrooms across the nation. Many Latino youth on trial during that time often received inordinate sentences, were charged as adults, while judges, prosecutors and police abused their powers.

Efren was sentenced to three life sentences for a crime he did not commit, while the guilty parties entered guilty pleas and received reduced sentences in exchange for their admissions of guilt. The individuals who plead guilty have since been released while Efren remains locked away.

I encourage you and others to circulate information about Efren's case and help us get justice for him. You can learn more by visiting www.4Efren.com and by reading the information below about what people can do to assist him.

Sincerely,

Saul Garza
The Injustice Must End (TIME)
Committee to Free Efren Paredes, Jr.

You can copy and paste the following into your web browser to follow the links:

Electronic Petition for Justice: www.petitionspot.com/petitions/4Efren
Web Site: www.4Efren.com
MySpace: www.Myspace.com/4Efren

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Fourth Grade Experience
Posted by: GPFrank on Oct 3, 2007 9:14 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
School was strict in the days of 1938.. There was an actual string
of lashes hung near the principal's door.

The teacher was a Ms. Cosgrove about whom my mother
even had made a comment, "Her mouth is a straight line" I was sitting at my desk and it was near closing time. Ms. Cosgrove suddenly called out in a loud voice, "Who threw that!" "Who threw that spitball! "Class will stay here until I find out who threw that spitball". She went on "I saw who threw "that but nobody leaves until he speaks up."

Then she pointed at me. "I saw you do it." 'The rest of the class leaves but you stay until you say you did it." "You are not going home until you confess."

I said," I didn't even see the spitball."
"You lie and I am going to tell your mother you lie"
I said, "My mother is going to worry about me not coming home>"
(My mother was strict about me coming home after leaving school while I could go out afterwards.)
"Then, just say you threw that spitball and you can go
home."
This kept on about half an hour. I began to hem and haw,
with, "Maybe you saw it pass by me and thought I was looking."
I finally confessed, saying "I did it" . Ms. Cosgrove won.

But I was ashamed of giving in for years afterwards. I felt it was wrong to confess to something someone else did. Even though I tried to rationalize that I could have thought it was actually funny.

But remember the 1935 purge trials In Stalin's Russia? How could minds be so twisted to confess to such complete nonsense?

There is something dog-like in human psychology yet to be understood.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]