False confessions: The role of police deception in interrogation and jurors' perceptions of the techniques and their outcomes

Our chapter explores police deception during interrogation with emphasis on false-evidence ploys and jurors perceptions of false-evidence ploys. We discuss the current literature on false confessions in response to police deception, and then we review ethical, legal, and constitutional questions related to police deception. Next, we extend these ideas into an important area of emerging scholarship: jurors perceptions of police deception. As the triers of fact in most criminal trials, jurors must decide verdicts in the context of each case, and, once a judge has admitted a confession into a trial, jurors must decide the defendants guilt in light of his or her confession. Can jurors rise to these legal expectations We review recent and ongoing research on jurors perceptions of false-evidence ploys and conclude with recommendations for police interrogators, attorneys, legislators, and scholars.