4.2.12 WC: 191694
The science of eliciting false confessions: the case of Jonathan Doody
Another murder case that never seems to end involves a man named Jonathan Doody, the son of a Thai mother and an American soldier, who was accused of the mass murder of nine Buddhist Monks and nuns in Arizona back in 1991. They were placed on the floor in a circle and systematically shot in the head, apparently by a group of armed robbers. Originally, a motorcycle gang was suspected of the crime. After a lengthy interrogation, four of them confessed, but it soon became clear to the police that they had been pressured into making false confessions and they were freed.
Doody, who was 1_ at the time, was then arrested and subjected to a similarly pressured 12 hour interrogation. The police began by giving him his Miranda warnings: you have the right to counsel; you have the right to remain silent; and anything you say can and will be used against you in the court. They then proceeded, gradually, to “demirandize” him, by taking back everything they had originally said! You have a right to an attorney “if you were involved in [the murders]”; anything you “tell us” is “gonna stay right here” and not be used “in court;” and “you just have to open up” —that is confess—and we will keep you here until you do. Finally, the exhausted _ year old confessed to being involved with the motorcycle gang—which the police knew was untrue—and to participating in the killings. Based largely on this questionable confession, he was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment.
When I first became involved in the case, I decided to do my own investigation. The murder scene was near a United States Airbase and I learned that Russia was selling some of the Soviet Union’s old satellite photographs of the United States. I bought the photographs for the day and location of the murder in the hope that perhaps they might show evidence that people other than Doody were responsible for the crime. Unfortunately, the sky was overcast that day and the photographs were useless. We would have to limit ourselves to making arguments based on the record of the trial, with an emphasis on how the police had elicited the confession from Doody. I did extensive research on the “science”—or “art”—of eliciting confessions from reluctant suspects. I learned how the interrogators place objects from the crime scene in view of the suspect, how they suggest answers, how they create an atmosphere of intimidation and omniscience, and how they contrive to turn the Miranda warnings to their own advantage.
I argued the initial appeal, along my brother Nathan’s office in 19__. The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. My brother’s partner, Victoria Eiger, then took prime responsibility for preparing a federal writ of habeus corpus. My brother and I worked closely with her. The matter simply sat before the federal judge for ___ years, before she rendereda___ page decision denying relief. We then appealed the denial to a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the 9" Circuit, which reversed Doody’s conviction in a 2-1 decision that ruled his confession involuntary and ordered him to be freed, unless the state granted him a new trial. The state then appealed the reversal to the entire 9" Circuit, which set the case down for argument before 11 judges. They also ruled in Doody’s favor by a vote of 9-3. Still the case was not over. The state sought a writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court which remanded the case back to the 9" Circuit for reconsideration in light of a recent Supreme Court decision. The 9" Circuit reconsidered and once again threw out Doody’s conviction on the ground that the confession was
200
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017287