UC Law Journal


Nearly all confessions obtained by interrogators nationwide are inadmissible, but nonetheless admitted. In the process, police arrest the wrong suspect and allow the guilty to go free. An unshakeable addiction to pseudo-scientific interrogation methods-initially created in the 1940s-is to blame. The so-called "Reid technique" of interrogation was initially a welcome and revolutionary change from the violent "third degree" method it replaced. But we no longer live in the 1940s and, not surprisingly, we no longer drive 1940s automobiles, practice early-twentieth-century medicine, or dial rotary phones. Why, then, are police still using 1940s methods of interrogation?

Moreover, the outdated Reid technique was premised on the very same principles that underlie the lie detector. At the time of its creation, then, the Reid technique was crafted from a "science" already discredited by nearly every court in the nation. From a policy standpoint, continued reliance on the Reid technique does a disservice to our justice system and unnecessarily risks obtaining inherently unreliable confessions. From an evidentiary standpoint, the methodology underlying the Reid technique fails every aspect of the Supreme Court's standards governing the admission of expert evidence. This Article therefore contends that all confessions obtained pursuant to the Reid method are-and were-absolutely inadmissible.

Included in

Law Commons