4 ms·

"OK, but any journalist writing on legal matters should know that the statutory maximum is not a good guide to the likely sentence in the event of a conviction"

"OK, but any journalist writing on legal matters should know that the statutory maximum is not a good guide to the likely sentence in the event of a conviction" It is, however, frequently used to intimidate people into giving up their rights. There is a reason that more people go to prison each year than could possibly be sentenced by a jury of their peers, and the maximum penalties allowed by the law is one of them. Let's put it this way: the four men in Norfolk who pled guilty to a rape and murder they were entirely innocent of did not do so because they were insane; they were simply terrified of the possibility that they might be executed (and the exhaustion of many hours of berating by the police did not help).

anigbrowl 14y ago
Maybe if journalists reported the law more assiduously instead of only mentioning the maximum sentence, that particular intimidation tactic wouldn't work as well, ever think of that?
- betterunix 14y ago
  Journalists accurately report the actual sentences given to convicts. That is pretty easy to forget after hours of police aggressive interrogation, when you are presented with the choice between a quick guilty plea for a few years or a trial with a maximum sentence remaining on the table. You might think that you'll be sitting there in an interrogation room, ready to stare down the cops when they threaten you with decades of jail time; it's a different matter when you are actually under arrest. The tactic works because of human psychology. Being in an interrogation room is terrifying, and people have a natural instinct to try to get out as soon as possible. The police interrogators are trained to extract confessions and play on those instincts and the general fear their subjects experience. The problem is not the press, it is the interrogation and plea bargaining process itself.
  - anigbrowl 14y ago
    Journalists accurately report the actual sentences given to convicts. My whole point is that such data are missing from this article, despite their relevance. The tactic works because of human psychology. Being in an interrogation room is terrifying, and people have a natural instinct to try to get out as soon as possible. I've been in one. I found it annoying rather than terrifying, but that's obviously not the case for many other people. For all its flaws, sitting people down and asking them uncomfortable questions is one of the better techniques we have for solving crimes, and I find it vastly preferable to the use of things like truth serums or lie detectors.

anigbrowl 14y ago

Maybe if journalists reported the law more assiduously instead of only mentioning the maximum sentence, that particular intimidation tactic wouldn't work as well, ever think of that?

betterunix 14y ago
Journalists accurately report the actual sentences given to convicts. That is pretty easy to forget after hours of police aggressive interrogation, when you are presented with the choice between a quick guilty plea for a few years or a trial with a maximum sentence remaining on the table. You might think that you'll be sitting there in an interrogation room, ready to stare down the cops when they threaten you with decades of jail time; it's a different matter when you are actually under arrest. The tactic works because of human psychology. Being in an interrogation room is terrifying, and people have a natural instinct to try to get out as soon as possible. The police interrogators are trained to extract confessions and play on those instincts and the general fear their subjects experience. The problem is not the press, it is the interrogation and plea bargaining process itself.
- anigbrowl 14y ago
  Journalists accurately report the actual sentences given to convicts. My whole point is that such data are missing from this article, despite their relevance. The tactic works because of human psychology. Being in an interrogation room is terrifying, and people have a natural instinct to try to get out as soon as possible. I've been in one. I found it annoying rather than terrifying, but that's obviously not the case for many other people. For all its flaws, sitting people down and asking them uncomfortable questions is one of the better techniques we have for solving crimes, and I find it vastly preferable to the use of things like truth serums or lie detectors.