Expert Testimony on False Confessions Gets Mixed Reception in State High Court

Expert testimony on false confessions and the interrogation techniques and psychological factors that tend to generate them is not admissible under the standard for expert testimony set out in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), a divided majority of the Michigan Supreme Court decided July 30. (People v. Kowalski, Mich., No. 141932)

The phenomena surrounding false confessions are beyond the ken of ordinary jurors and thus potentially admissible, but researchers’ difficulty demonstrating the accuracy of their falsity determinations keeps their testimony from being sufficiently reliable, the court reasoned in a case that split the ...