The Usual Dubious Diligence

There is a case in Indiana of a man charged with the murder of two very young girls five years ago.  [The NYTimes Story].  

And More.

Liberty German and Abigail Williams went for a hike in a wooded park February 12, 2013.  They did not return.  A day later, their bodies were found at the bottom of a nearby ravine.

We’ve learned a lot over the years about how the police work.

We know that the police absolutely hate it when they don’t solve a crime that provokes a strong emotional response in the community, as in this case: two teenaged girls.

We know that once the police have landed on a possible suspect, they tend to have tunnel vision about any other possible suspects.  Because… well, they have a suspect.  They anticipate accolades from the credulous public: they caught the guy.  They nailed him.  Justice will prevail.

Hang him!

It’s not always clear whether the police are fully aware of how thin the evidence might be but don’t care, or whether they really believe that someone they have arrested and interrogated and pressured and incarcerated and threatened with a long, long prison sentence or even death, is guilty.  I think probably both.  It is clear that once the police have fixated on a suspect, they will come to believe that he is the only one who could have and did commit the crime.

In the case of Richard Allen, all the hallmarks of a wrongful conviction are there.  The evidence is extremely thin: no fingerprints, no blood stains, no objects that can be linked to the crime found in his house or car, no witnesses.  Just a grainy photo from a video on one of the girls’ cell phones.

There is a composite drawing the police issued with a wanted poster and a hefty reward offered for tips.

“It came through because of information that we received from persons that were in the area,” around the time the girls went missing, he said. “Either we did not make contact for the first time, or they were afraid to come forward.”

Sgt. Riley said the sketch artist had started about a month ago to piece together the descriptions, frequently consulting the witness or witnesses to refine the drawing. Investigators also interview people offering descriptions to make sure they are not just trying to get someone into trouble, he said.

The police had not disclosed where they got the composite drawing from.  It is not reassuring when the police insist that they took steps to make sure the source “was not just trying to get someone into trouble”. 

If I told you I didn’t take any money out of your wallet, what would you think?  You would think, why would I think you would think I took money out of your wallet?  

We don’t know if it was someone who might have seen the possible suspect in the area on the day the girls disappeared, or if it was given by someone who knew a man whom she thought was “creepy” and might have done it.  

Mr. Allen was held in solitary confinement.  After an extended period, he began to volunteer a confession to the murders.  We know how that works.

The only other evidence appears to be a bullet found near the crime scene that the police allege could have come from a gun owned by Mr. Allen:

Five years later, on Oct. 13, 2022, Mr. Allen was interviewed again and his home was searched. Investigators found a gun at Mr. Allen’s home that they determined to have at one point held the unspent round that was found near the victims’ bodies, the affidavit said.

Now, think about that.  Did they find the gun’s DNA on the bullet?  They can’t be serious.  Would a jury believe this?  This is ridiculous.

Think about the fact that the police would be extremely disappointed if it turned out that Richard Allen was not a very good suspect.  Well, he isn’t a very good suspect.  Not from the evidence they have presented.

Juries trust the police.  If the police say they have good reason to believe Richard Allen murdered Liberty German and Abigail Williams, well then, that’s good enough for me.  So what if they don’t have much evidence: they probably have stuff they can’t show us because of all those stupid laws protecting the rights of suspects.  You see it on TV all the time.

When you were in high school, did you know any really bright kids?  Did any of them become police officers?  I didn’t think so.

 

 

 

 

And More Wrongful Convictions

2011-10-09

This is unbelievable:

When Lou Tessmann retired from the Waukegan police in 2005, the Illinois House of Representatives passed a resolution praising his two decades of service. The resolution noted that Tessmann, a former Marine, is “well known for his interrogation techniques on suspects of crimes.”… Mr. Tessmann has obtained over 80 homicide confessions during his career with only three instances where he was unable to obtain a confession from a homicide suspect” — a 96 percent success rate — according to the Web site of his employer, Wicklander-Zulawski & Associates. NY Times, 2011-11-26

For a better understanding of what Tessmann is really up to, check out someone with similar or identical skills: Darren Brown.

So what we have here is an interrogator who, if you put him in a room with somebody, will be able to persuade this person to confess to a serious felony 96% of the time.

Which means that 96% of the time, the police have guessed right: the first guy they hand over to Tessmann is the “right” suspect.

Do you believe that there is a 96% probability of this happening? I don’t. I don’t believe the real number is even close to that. In fact, I believe that 96% is a preposterous number.

Unfortunately, I have no doubt that a lot of people will believe that, indeed, the police have the right suspect almost 100% of the time.

I firmly believe that if you chose someone at random, off the streets, and put Lou Tessemann in the room with him, you would have a confession 96% of the time. To what? What would you like him to confess to? Name it.

In fact, Tessemann has been sued successfully more than once for precisely that.

It gets worse: in at least one case, he blatantly lied that a mother had told him that “six children were enough” and, therefore, she killed her own seventh child. (DNA testing later proved the dead child could not have been hers.)

I don’t think it would be enough to make sure this guy never participates in another interrogation. I believe he should be charged with conspiracy to obstruct justice and sent to prison for 20 years or more: he is a criminal in the precise sense of the word.