Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MythBusters Helped a Wrongly Convicted Man Prove His Innocence

innocenceproject.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 184 posts

Re: MythBusters Helped a Wrongly Convicted Man Prove His Innocence

#81

Post by anon_cow1111 »

gnicholas wrote: post #38

So if it’s impossible to light a pool of gasoline with a match, what is being used in movies when this appears to happen?

Cigarette, not a match, which is an important detail. Gasoline absolutely will ignite if you drop a burning match on it (assuming the match doesn't go out as it's falling).

If a movie shows a close-up slow motion shot of a match hitting the ground+igniting gasoline, it's probably "real", but the larger shot of the building or whatever going up is filmed separately. They usually use propane/natural gas for large fires because it can be piped in and turned on/off easily.

Re: MythBusters Helped a Wrongly Convicted Man Prove His Innocence

#82

Post by Per_Bothner »

giantg2 wrote: post #52

So why is deception wrong in an interrogation? I can see some of the other tactics as problematic, but not that directly.

Deception can lead to false confessions (people's memories are very malleable) or plea bargains (accept 2 years vs risking 15 years).

Re: MythBusters Helped a Wrongly Convicted Man Prove His Innocence

#83

Post by gnicholas »

anon_cow1111 wrote: post #81
gnicholas wrote: post #38

So if it’s impossible to light a pool of gasoline with a match, what is being used in movies when this appears to happen?

Cigarette , not a match, which is an important detail. Gasoline absolutely will ignite if you drop a burning match on it (assuming the match doesn't go out as it's falling). If a movie shows a close-up slow motion shot of a match hitting the ground+igniting gasoline, it's probably "real", but the larger shot of the building or whatever going up is filmed separately. They usually use propane/natural gas for large fire…

Ah yes, good point. So what is it different about a match and a cigarette? Is the latter always successful?

Re: MythBusters Helped a Wrongly Convicted Man Prove His Innocence

#84

Post by Archelaos »

> In 2021, Illinois and Oregon became the first states to ban the use of deception during interrogations of minors ...

Is there any other modern democracy that allows deception as a method of interrogation to the same extent as the US?

In my country, Germany, deception during interrogations is forbitten even for adults. There exist only some minor exceptions, for example, that prior wrong ideas of the suspects may be exploited.

The central paragraph of the law is as follows:

(1) The accused's freedom to decide and exercise his or her will may not be impaired by ill-treatment, by fatigue, by physical intervention, by the administration of drugs, by torment [Quälerei], by deception [Täuschung] or by hypnosis. Coercion may only be used to the extent permitted by the law of criminal procedure. The threat of a measure inadmissible under its provisions and the promise of an advantage not provided for by law shall be prohibited.

(2) Measures that impair the accused's capacity to remember or to reason shall not be permitted.

(3) The prohibition in sections 1 and 2 shall apply without regard to the consent of the accused. Statements made in violation of this prohibition may not be used even if the accused consents to their use.

§ 136a StPO -- German text at https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stpo/__136a.html

Re: MythBusters Helped a Wrongly Convicted Man Prove His Innocence

#85

Post by Retric »

lliamander wrote: post #75
Retric wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2% of people on death row get exonerated and that’s an underestimate due to the difficulty in proving innocence. Most crimes don’t see anything close to that level of review before or after conviction with death row reserved for the most clear cut cases. So, most estimates suggest in the range of 2-10% of convictions are probably wrongful.

> due to the difficulty in proving innocence. Remember: the person started out in a position of presumed innocence, and were found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I would expect it to be hard to prove innocence after enough evidence was provided to prove guilt. Note: I am not saying the system always operates according to principles - that's why those 2% get exonerated. I just wouldn't expect the real number of fal…

Perhaps I phrased it poorly. The standard for proving innocence is raised above a “Preponderance of the evidence” to “Clear and convincing evidence.”

That’s a high standard which if lowered would obviously see more innocent people set free. But we shouldn’t assume there is actually any evidence proving innocence, after all before DNA testing many people who would currently be set free where killed. At best we can estimate who would be set free if we could actually view the past.

Re: MythBusters Helped a Wrongly Convicted Man Prove His Innocence

#86

Post by giantg2 »

lupire wrote: post #80
giantg2 wrote: post #52

So why is deception wrong in an interrogation? I can see some of the other tactics as problematic, but not that directly.

Why is deception right? Even the 10 commandments oppose it. Deception leads to false convictions.

"Deception leads to false convictions."

How?

Re: MythBusters Helped a Wrongly Convicted Man Prove His Innocence

#87

Post by googlryas »

pkrotich wrote: post #35

What scares me about US legal system is; Elected prosectutors are motivated by high conviction rate for obvious reasons (re-election and politics of it all). Add the fact that their line of work requires competitive personalities and you become just but a number, especially if you don't have competent cousel. I'm not saying ALL public defendors are incompetent, but we see to many cases of ineffective representation w…

Prosecutors are also motivated to not have an expose written on how they sent numerous innocent people to jail. It's not just about conviction rate.

Re: MythBusters Helped a Wrongly Convicted Man Prove His Innocence

#88

Post by viiralvx »

giantg2 wrote: post #86
lupire wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is deception right? Even the 10 commandments oppose it. Deception leads to false convictions.

"Deception leads to false convictions." How?

I can't tell if you're being willfully dense or serious. If you're deceiving people and pressuring them to lie in order to close a case, they will say anything to be released, potentially not knowing the implications.

Re: MythBusters Helped a Wrongly Convicted Man Prove His Innocence

#89

Post by nostromo »

lupire wrote: post #78
nostromo wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This works both ways. The US is experiencing a crime wave currently and in several major cities, it’s become next to impossible to actually send someone to jail due to political pressures. Most prosecutors are not running as tough on crime, but on equity platforms. (In Seattle, for example, a candidate for prosecutor, Nicole Thomas-Kennedy, ran on abolishing the police, jails, and vowed not to prosecute most crimes.)…

> The US used to solve the majority of murder cases, but now it’s solving less than half Closs the cases, not solve. It's good that police can't convict innocent people as easily anymore.

Even at the highest estimates of false imprisonments, it still means several thousands of murderers are walking free each year that wouldn’t have just 10 years ago.

Re: MythBusters Helped a Wrongly Convicted Man Prove His Innocence

#90

Post by giantg2 »

Per_Bothner wrote: post #82
giantg2 wrote: post #52

So why is deception wrong in an interrogation? I can see some of the other tactics as problematic, but not that directly.

Deception can lead to false confessions (people's memories are very malleable) or plea bargains (accept 2 years vs risking 15 years).

Aren't those false confessions usually the result of the other tactics (long interrogations, intimidation, etc)? I'm wondering if there's some data on deception without these other factors. Even plea bargains aren't a bad thing except if they're abused.
Post reply on HN