Three False Convictions, Many Lessons

A new perspective on why false charges occur, proceed and persist which looks at the roles of psychopathology, confirmation bias, false confessions, the media and internet among other causes. Puts lack of empathy at the fore in terms of police, prosecutors and others whilst considering a wide range of other psychopathological aspects of false convictions. Based on first-hand knowledge or involvement (David Anderson was Stefan Kiszko's endocrinologist and attended both his and the Knox/Sollecito trial). What drives false but serious criminal charges and why do police and prosecutors often persist against those wrongly in the dock? As this book shows-by looking at three high profile cases, those of Amanda Knox and Raffaele Sollecito (Italy), Stefan Kiszko (UK) and Darlie Routier (USA)-motive forces are a mind-set in which psychopathy (what the authors charitably term 'constitutional negative empathy') may be present and in which confirmation bias (the need to reinforce a decision once made or lose face) plays a large part.Darlie Routier is still on death row in Texas despite overwhelming evidence that her conviction for killing her own child is false, whilst Knox, Sollecito and Kiszko have been vindicated by the highest and best of authority and compelling evidence.The authors show how wholly unfounded rumours still persist in the Knox/Sollecito case due to hostile media and internet trolling. In the Routier case they advance a new theory that the killings (two in all) were in fact the work of a notorious serial killer.'In the light of all this, questionable trial procedures need to be overhauled, with much greater recognition of (their) imperfections and of the general imbalance in favour of the prosecution. Greater weight needs to be given...to establishing real, rather than merely judicial, truth' - (Chapter 11).