Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-n9wrp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T03:07:12.791Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Miranda's Revenge: Police Interrogation as a Confidence Game

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2024

Richard A. Leo
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

By requiring that police issue fourfold warnings to silence and appointed counsel prior to any custodial questioning, Miranda v. Arizona (1966) created universalistic criteria for the legal regulation of police interrogations. While Miranda appears to be partly responsible for the dramatic decline in violence in the interrogation room in the 20th century, American police have become skilled at the practice of manipulation and deception during interrogation. Drawing on more than 500 hours of participant observation fieldwork in three police departments, I argue that the sequence, structure, and process of contemporary American police interrogation can best be understood as a confidence game based on the manipulation and betrayal of trust. Understanding interrogation as a confidence game, I argue, goes a long way toward explaining (1) the paradoxical observation that criminal suspects continue to provide police with incriminating statements, admissions and confessions in the majority of cases; (2) the nature of the social interaction during interrogation more generally; and (3) how contemporary police interrogators both exercise and mystify their power inside the interrogation room.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , 1996 , pp. 259 - 288
Copyright
Copyright © 1996 by The Law and Society Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

I thank Mark Cooney, David T. Johnson, Jonathan Lang, Gary Marx, Richard Ofshe, Tom Scanlon, Jerome Skolnick, Franklin Zimring and four anonymous reviewers for helpful comments.

References

References

Akerstrom, Malin (1991) Betrayal and Betrayers: The Sociology of Treachery. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Baker, Liva (1983) Miranda: Crime, Law and Politics. New York: Atheneum Press.Google Scholar
Blum, Richard (1972) Deceivers and Deceived: Observations on Confidence Men and Their Victims, Informants and Their Quarry, Political and Industrial Spies and Ordinary Citizens. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.Google Scholar
Blumberg, Abraham (1967) “The Practice of Law as a Confidence Game: Organizational Cooptation of a Profession,” 1 Law & Society Rev. 15.Google Scholar
Brannon, W. T. (1948) Yellow Kid Weil: The Autobiography of America's Master Swindler. Chicago: Ziff-Davis.Google Scholar
Cassell, Paul (1995) “How Many Criminals Has Miranda Set Free?” Wall Street J., 1 March 1995, p. A17.Google Scholar
Cassell, Paul (1996) “Miranda's Social Costs: An Empirical Reassessment,” 90 Northwestern Univ. Law Rev. (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Cialdini, Robert (1993) Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. rev. ed. New York: Morrow.Google Scholar
Connery, Donald S. (1977) Guilty until Proven Innocent. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons.Google Scholar
“Eye to Eye,” NBC News Show with Connie Chung, “Confession,” 13 Jan. 1994.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm (1979) The Process Is the Punishment: Handling Cases in a Lower Criminal Court. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Gasser, Robert Louis (1963) “The Confidence Game,” 27 Federal Probation 47.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving (1952) “On Cooling the Mark Out: Some Aspects of Adaptation to Failure,” 15 Psychiatry 451.Google Scholar
Graham, Fred P. (1970) The Self-inflicted Wound. New York: Macmillan Co.Google Scholar
Griffiths, John, & Ayres, Richard (1967) “A Postscript to the Miranda Project: Interrogation of Draft Protesters,” 77 Yale Law J. 300.Google Scholar
Gudjonsson, Gisli H. (1992) The Psychology of Interrogations, Confessions and Testimony. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Hart, William (1981) “The Subtle Art of Persuasion,” Police Mag., p. 7 (March).Google Scholar
Inbau, , Fred, E., Reid, John E., & Buckley, Joseph P. (1986) Criminal Interrogation and Confessions. 3d Ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
Inciardi, James (1973) “The History and Sociology of Professional Crime.” Doctoral diss., New York Univ.Google Scholar
Jayne, Brian (1986) “The Psychological Principles of Criminal Interrogation,” in Inbau et al. 1986.Google Scholar
Leff, Arthur (1976) Swindling and Selling. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Leiken, L. S. (1970) “Police Interrogation in Colorado: The Implementation of Miranda,” 47 Denver Law J. 1.Google Scholar
Leo, Richard A. (1992) “From Coercion to Deception: The Changing Nature of Police Interrogation in America,” 18 Crime, Law & Social Change 35.Google Scholar
Leo, Richard A. (1994a) “Police Interrogation and Social Control,” 3 Social & Legal Studies 93.Google Scholar
Leo, Richard A. (1994b) “Police Interrogation in America: A Study of Violence, Civility and Social Change.” Doctoral diss., Univ. of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Leo, Richard A. (1995a) “False Memory, False Confession: When Police Interrogations Go Wrong.” Presented at Law & Society Association Annual Meeting, Toronto, June 1995.Google Scholar
Leo, Richard A. (1995b) “Trial and Tribulations: Courts, Ethnography, and the Need for an Evidentiary Privilege for Academic Researchers,” 26 American Sociologist 113.Google Scholar
Leo, Richard A. (1996a) “Inside the Interrogation Room,” 86 J. of Criminal Law & Criminology (forthcoming).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leo, Richard A. (1996b) “The Impact of Miranda Revisited,” 86 J. of Criminal Law & Criminology (forthcoming).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malone, Patrick (1986) “You Have the Right to Remain Silent: Miranda after Twenty Years,” 55 American Scholar 367.Google Scholar
Mann, Kenneth (1985) Defending White-Collar Crime: A Portrait of Attorneys at Work. New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Maurer, David (1940) The Big Con: The Story of the Confidence Man and the Confidence Game. New York: Bobbs-Merrill Co.Google Scholar
McIntyre, Lisa (1987) The Public Defender: The Practice of Law in the Shadows of Repute. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Medalie, Richard J., Zeitz, Leonard, & Alexander, Paul (1968) “Custodial Police Interrogation in Our Nation's Capital: The Attempt to Implement Miranda,” 66 Michigan Law Rev. 1347.Google Scholar
Milner, Neil A. (1970) “Comparative Analysis of Patterns of Compliance with Supreme Court Decisions: Miranda and the Police in Four Communities,” 4 Law & Society Rev. 119.Google Scholar
Milner, Neil A. (1971) The Court and Local Law Enforcement: The Impact of Miranda. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Nash, Jay (1976) Hustlers and Con Men: An Anecdotal History of the Confidence Man and His Games. New York: M. Evans Publishing.Google Scholar
Neubauer, David W. (1974a) “Confessions in Prairie City: Some Causes and Effects,” 65 J. of Criminal Law & Criminology 103.Google Scholar
Neubauer, David W. (1974b) Criminal Justice in Middle America. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.Google Scholar
Oakes, Guy (1990) The Soul of the Salesman: The Moral Ethos of Personal Sales. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Ofshe, Richard (1989) “Coerced Confessions: The Logic of Seemingly Irrational Action,” 6 Cultic Studies J. 6.Google Scholar
Page, Jack (1990) “A Question of Justice: A Father's Plea for Bradley Page,” East Bay Express, 12 Oct. 1990, pp. 1, 12–16, 18–23.Google Scholar
Parloff, Roger (1993) “False Confessions: Standard Interrogations by Arizona Law Enforcement Officials Led to Four Matching Confessions to the Murders of Nine People at a Buddhist Temple. But All Four Suspects Were Innocent,” American Lawyer, May 1993, p. 58.Google Scholar
Pratkanis, Anthony, & Aronson, Elliot (1992) Age of Propaganda: The Everyday Use and Abuse of Persuasion. New York: W. H. Freeman & Co.Google Scholar
Prus, Robert, & Sharper, C. R. D. (1977) Road Hustler: The Career Contingencies of Professional Card and Dice Hustlers. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Robinson, Cyril D. (1968) “Police and Prosecutor Practices and Attitudes Relating to Interrogation as Revealed by Pre- and Post-Miranda Questionnaires: A Construct of Police Capacity to Comply,” 3 Duke Law J. 425.Google Scholar
Royal, Robert F., & Schutt, Steven R. (1976) The Gentle Art of Interviewing and Interrogation: A Professional Manual and Guide. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Sanders, William (1976) “Pumps and Pauses: Strategic Use of Conversational Structure in Interrogations,” in Sanders, W. B., ed., The Sociologist as Detective: An Introduction to Research Methods. New York: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
Sarat, Austin, & Felstiner, William L. F. (1995) Divorce Lawyers and Their Clients: Power and Meaning in the Legal Process. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaefer, Roger C. (1971) “Patrolman Perspectives on Miranda,” Law & the Social Order, p. 81.Google Scholar
Schulhofer, Stephen (1996) “Miranda by the Data: Substantial Benefits and Vanishingly Small Social Costs,” 90 Northwestern Univ. Law Rev. (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Schur, E. M. (1958) “Sociological Analysis of Swindling,” 48 J. of Criminal Law, Criminology, & Political Science 296.Google Scholar
Seeburger, Richard, & Stanton Wettick, R. Jr. (1967) “Miranda in Pittsburgh—A Statistical Study,” 29 Pittsburgh Law Rev. 1.Google Scholar
Shorris, Earl (1994) A Nation of Salesmen: The Tyranny of the Market and the Subversion of Culture. New York: W. W. Norton & Co.Google Scholar
Simon, David (1991) Homicide: A Year on the Killing Streets. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.Google Scholar
Stephens, Otis (1973) The Supreme Court and Confessions of Guilt. Knoxville: Univ. of Tennessee Press.Google Scholar
Stephens, Otis, Flanders, Robert, & Cannon, J. Lewis (1972) “Law Enforcement and the Supreme Court: Police Perceptions of the Miranda Requirements,” 39 Tennessee Law Rev. 407.Google Scholar
Sutherland, Edwin (1937) The Professional Thief. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Toobin, Jeffrey (1987) “Viva Miranda,” New Republic, pp. 11–12 (Feb.1987).Google Scholar
Wald, Michael, Ayres, R., Hess, D. W., Schantz, M., & Whitebread, C. H. (1967) “Interrogations in New Haven: The Impact of Miranda,” 76 Yale Law J. 1519.Google Scholar
Walker, Samuel (1993) Taming the System: The Control of Discretion in Criminal Justice, 1950–1990. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, D. R. (1990) “Some Features of the Elicitation of Confessions in Murder Interrogations,” in Psathas, G., ed., Interaction Competence. Lanham, MD: Univ. Press of America.Google Scholar
Witt, James W. (1973) “Non-coercive Interrogation and the Administration of Criminal Justice: The Impact of Miranda on Police Effectuality,” 64 J. of Criminal Law & Criminology 320.Google Scholar
Wowk, Maria T. (1984) “Blame Allocation, Sex and Gender in a Murder Interrogation,” 7 Women's Studies International Forum 75.Google Scholar
Wright, Lawrence (1994) Remembering Satan: A Case of Recovered Memory and the Shattering of an American Family. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Wrightsman, Lawrence, & Kassin, Saul (1993) Confessions in the Courtroom. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yant, Martin (1991) Presumed Guilty: When Innocent People Are Wrongly Convicted. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Press.Google Scholar
Younger, Evelle (1966) “Results of a Survey Conducted in the District Attorney's Office of Los Angeles County Regarding the Effect of the Miranda Decision upon the Prosecution of Felony Cases,” 5 American Criminal Law Q. 32.Google Scholar

Cases

Brown v. Mississippi, 297 U.S. 278 (1936).Google Scholar
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).Google Scholar
People v. Honeycutt, 20 Cal. 3d, 150 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar