4 ms·

> The Reid technique has been used by law enforcement to convince criminals of confessions. Many confessions were found to be false. This is one reason among m

> The Reid technique has been used by law enforcement to convince criminals of confessions. Many confessions were found to be false. This is one reason among many why it is a serious question to ask whether a confession increases or actually rather decreases the likelihood that the culprit commited the crime.

mbg721 3y ago
That only matters if the truth is a major consideration. Some theories of justice don't care, as long as social order is maintained.
- isaacremuant 3y ago
  Which theories of justice? What countries are practicing this supposed theory? Because this greater good thing sounds earily similar like the end justifies the means, which could argue for decimating a whole village to catch criminals as long as "overall social order of a larger group is contained".
  - mbg721 3y ago
    I think most countries practice some form of "order is better than truth", including the US. There are famous examples of US courts rejecting arguments on the basis that "just because you have proof that you were wrongly convicted doesn't give you standing to appeal".
  - ant6n 3y ago
    Cardassians. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribunal_(Star_Trek:_Deep_Space_Nine) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribunal_(Star_Trek:_Deep_Sp...
- madsbuch 3y ago
  > as long as social order is maintained That would rely on the participants believing that truth is the major consideration, right? If I knew that I would have to prove my innocence, that would lead to a lot of overhead for self surveillance and documentation. Ie. If the custom of just accepting false confessions becomes a widely accepted practice it could potentially lead to reduction of social order.
  - gweinberg 3y ago
    Not really. Lots of societies have required accused criminals to be tortured until they confess. Presumably they would generally only torture people they believed were guilty, but there was no reason to be more confident the person was guilty after confession than before. The confession was purely of ritual significance.
    - madsbuch 3y ago
      > Presumably they would generally only torture people they believed were guilty, so in their system of belief, they are truthfully guilty. the question I am asking is whether you can divorce truth from confession. if the society cannot believe that a confessing person is indeed guilty, then it will not uphold societal order.
      - ang_cire 3y ago
        Gladiatorial combat was used to help preserve the social order. Public executions were often just that but skipping the combat part, and people would often cheer them on like a football game. You'd be surprised how little people care about innocence and justice. They care more about the entertainment value and reddit drama of discussing the convictions than actual justice or truth. People want to hear that bad things are being done to "bad people", and won't interrogate that label too deeply.
        madsbuch 3y ago
        I think the point is believe. I agree that it takes just little to believe anything. But my point is that we can not divorce the belief
  - UncleMeat 3y ago
    In the US, a claim of actual innocence based on new evidence is not sufficient to reopen a death penalty conviction, so long as the court case was performed fairly.

mbg721 3y ago

That only matters if the truth is a major consideration. Some theories of justice don't care, as long as social order is maintained.

isaacremuant 3y ago
Which theories of justice? What countries are practicing this supposed theory? Because this greater good thing sounds earily similar like the end justifies the means, which could argue for decimating a whole village to catch criminals as long as "overall social order of a larger group is contained".
- mbg721 3y ago
  I think most countries practice some form of "order is better than truth", including the US. There are famous examples of US courts rejecting arguments on the basis that "just because you have proof that you were wrongly convicted doesn't give you standing to appeal".
- ant6n 3y ago
  Cardassians. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribunal_(Star_Trek:_Deep_Space_Nine) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribunal_(Star_Trek:_Deep_Sp...
madsbuch 3y ago
> as long as social order is maintained That would rely on the participants believing that truth is the major consideration, right? If I knew that I would have to prove my innocence, that would lead to a lot of overhead for self surveillance and documentation. Ie. If the custom of just accepting false confessions becomes a widely accepted practice it could potentially lead to reduction of social order.
- gweinberg 3y ago
  Not really. Lots of societies have required accused criminals to be tortured until they confess. Presumably they would generally only torture people they believed were guilty, but there was no reason to be more confident the person was guilty after confession than before. The confession was purely of ritual significance.
  - madsbuch 3y ago
    > Presumably they would generally only torture people they believed were guilty, so in their system of belief, they are truthfully guilty. the question I am asking is whether you can divorce truth from confession. if the society cannot believe that a confessing person is indeed guilty, then it will not uphold societal order.
    - ang_cire 3y ago
      Gladiatorial combat was used to help preserve the social order. Public executions were often just that but skipping the combat part, and people would often cheer them on like a football game. You'd be surprised how little people care about innocence and justice. They care more about the entertainment value and reddit drama of discussing the convictions than actual justice or truth. People want to hear that bad things are being done to "bad people", and won't interrogate that label too deeply.
      - madsbuch 3y ago
        I think the point is believe. I agree that it takes just little to believe anything. But my point is that we can not divorce the belief
- UncleMeat 3y ago
  In the US, a claim of actual innocence based on new evidence is not sufficient to reopen a death penalty conviction, so long as the court case was performed fairly.