1 00:00:05,640 --> 00:00:06,040 Speaker 1: Kiota. 2 00:00:06,160 --> 00:00:09,360 Speaker 2: I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page, a 3 00:00:09,440 --> 00:00:17,160 Speaker 2: daily podcast presented by the New Zealand Herald. Police interviewing 4 00:00:17,280 --> 00:00:22,119 Speaker 2: techniques have been a controversial topic here and around the globe. 5 00:00:22,520 --> 00:00:26,040 Speaker 2: There have been countless high profile cases where someone has 6 00:00:26,079 --> 00:00:32,280 Speaker 2: been convicted but later exonerated and their interrogations questioned. In 7 00:00:32,320 --> 00:00:36,040 Speaker 2: New Zealand, Tana Pora was wrongfully convicted of murder and 8 00:00:36,280 --> 00:00:39,839 Speaker 2: rape largely based on a confession given during a lengthy 9 00:00:40,000 --> 00:00:44,760 Speaker 2: police interview, and more recently, Harry Matchett had his manslaughter 10 00:00:44,840 --> 00:00:49,360 Speaker 2: conviction quashed after a so called false confession. He spent 11 00:00:49,560 --> 00:00:53,400 Speaker 2: three years behind bars and is now seeking six hundred 12 00:00:53,520 --> 00:00:58,320 Speaker 2: thousand dollars in compensation. So why do people confess to 13 00:00:58,400 --> 00:01:01,720 Speaker 2: things they didn't do? Today on the Front Page, forensic 14 00:01:01,800 --> 00:01:07,280 Speaker 2: psychologist Rosie Mittweet joins us to discuss the psychology behind 15 00:01:07,440 --> 00:01:16,520 Speaker 2: police interviews. So tell me why might someone confess to 16 00:01:16,600 --> 00:01:18,720 Speaker 2: a crime that they actually didn't commit. 17 00:01:19,400 --> 00:01:22,880 Speaker 3: Well, first of all, let's think about what a confession is. 18 00:01:24,520 --> 00:01:28,920 Speaker 3: A confession in a police context and the criminal context 19 00:01:29,000 --> 00:01:32,120 Speaker 3: is when somebody basically admits to the crime. But you 20 00:01:32,120 --> 00:01:34,080 Speaker 3: can get different types of confessions. You can get a 21 00:01:34,080 --> 00:01:38,920 Speaker 3: full confession. You've accused me of X, and I've admitted it, 22 00:01:39,360 --> 00:01:41,880 Speaker 3: and I've got and tell you why and all the 23 00:01:41,920 --> 00:01:44,080 Speaker 3: details that you want. But then you can also get 24 00:01:44,240 --> 00:01:49,240 Speaker 3: tentative confessions. So I'm not telling you that I did it. 25 00:01:50,320 --> 00:01:54,520 Speaker 3: I'm not necessarily saying I didn't do it, but I 26 00:01:55,480 --> 00:01:59,400 Speaker 3: give some information that supports that I did it. So 27 00:01:59,440 --> 00:02:01,880 Speaker 3: I might say something like, well, if you say so, 28 00:02:03,640 --> 00:02:09,320 Speaker 3: then I did or I probably did it. So we've 29 00:02:09,320 --> 00:02:12,400 Speaker 3: got to be careful of that. A full confession or 30 00:02:12,440 --> 00:02:15,960 Speaker 3: a full admission versus a tentative one. 31 00:02:16,280 --> 00:02:18,640 Speaker 2: And in both of those cases, I mean, we have 32 00:02:18,840 --> 00:02:22,600 Speaker 2: seen instances where people have you know, done a full 33 00:02:22,639 --> 00:02:25,840 Speaker 2: confession or a partial confession, or have said probably, you know, 34 00:02:25,880 --> 00:02:28,840 Speaker 2: I may have been there, I probably did that, but 35 00:02:28,880 --> 00:02:32,840 Speaker 2: in fact, years later, things like DNA has you know, 36 00:02:33,080 --> 00:02:36,880 Speaker 2: found out that that is completely not the case. Why 37 00:02:36,919 --> 00:02:40,120 Speaker 2: would someone say, yes, I did it. 38 00:02:40,600 --> 00:02:46,080 Speaker 3: I think that probably in most cases in life, if 39 00:02:46,160 --> 00:02:49,600 Speaker 3: you think outside of the coult room context, I think 40 00:02:49,639 --> 00:02:53,480 Speaker 3: most of us have probably confessed to something that we 41 00:02:53,520 --> 00:02:57,480 Speaker 3: didn't do right. And a good example of that is 42 00:02:57,520 --> 00:03:00,000 Speaker 3: maybe back in the school days, when one of your 43 00:03:00,120 --> 00:03:02,920 Speaker 3: mates is getting into trouble for something and you just 44 00:03:02,960 --> 00:03:05,840 Speaker 3: take the fall for them, or you might protect a 45 00:03:05,880 --> 00:03:09,720 Speaker 3: sibling against your angry parents. Question then becomes like if 46 00:03:10,800 --> 00:03:15,400 Speaker 3: if you think, well, at one time, I did take 47 00:03:15,440 --> 00:03:18,120 Speaker 3: the blame for something where I knew I didn't do it, 48 00:03:19,200 --> 00:03:23,800 Speaker 3: or I apologized for something and I knew I wasn't 49 00:03:23,800 --> 00:03:26,639 Speaker 3: responsible for what I did, but I apologize. So if 50 00:03:26,680 --> 00:03:30,520 Speaker 3: you like that might be an attentative admission of sorts. 51 00:03:31,240 --> 00:03:34,880 Speaker 3: You can just sit back now and downplay that and think, oh, yeah, 52 00:03:34,920 --> 00:03:38,320 Speaker 3: it's something that I did, it was a long time ago, 53 00:03:38,680 --> 00:03:41,160 Speaker 3: and you just cast over it. But if you actually 54 00:03:41,400 --> 00:03:45,640 Speaker 3: stop in pouts and reflect on why did you do that? 55 00:03:46,640 --> 00:03:46,880 Speaker 1: Right? 56 00:03:47,360 --> 00:03:50,240 Speaker 3: Why did you take the blame for something that you 57 00:03:50,280 --> 00:03:54,960 Speaker 3: didn't do. Most typically, if you were to stop and think, well, yeah, 58 00:03:55,440 --> 00:03:57,600 Speaker 3: back at school, I took the fall for my maid, 59 00:03:58,040 --> 00:03:59,480 Speaker 3: Well you might say, well, I did it out of 60 00:03:59,560 --> 00:04:02,240 Speaker 3: loyalty to them than my friend, and I didn't want 61 00:04:02,280 --> 00:04:05,320 Speaker 3: them to get into trouble, whereas the consequences for me 62 00:04:05,760 --> 00:04:08,920 Speaker 3: were less were far less severe. Things like that can 63 00:04:08,960 --> 00:04:14,520 Speaker 3: be quite powerful drivers for why somebody might make an 64 00:04:14,560 --> 00:04:18,880 Speaker 3: admission to something that they didn't do. So there's basically 65 00:04:19,080 --> 00:04:24,680 Speaker 3: mechanisms that we think are why people make false confessions. 66 00:04:24,839 --> 00:04:26,560 Speaker 3: That's one of them that I've already spoken about, a 67 00:04:26,640 --> 00:04:34,280 Speaker 3: voluntary confession, voluntary admission, so you literally volunteer the admission. 68 00:04:34,440 --> 00:04:40,560 Speaker 3: But the other one is confessions can be or retracted. 69 00:04:40,680 --> 00:04:44,320 Speaker 3: Confessions can come about when people say that they were 70 00:04:44,360 --> 00:04:48,480 Speaker 3: placed under pressure and they received inducements. 71 00:04:49,160 --> 00:04:52,760 Speaker 2: So that's the coercive confession or something. 72 00:04:53,440 --> 00:05:02,640 Speaker 3: Exactly exactly coercive. And now we used to think that 73 00:05:03,120 --> 00:05:09,839 Speaker 3: false or false admissions or unreliable admissions would only come 74 00:05:09,880 --> 00:05:16,479 Speaker 3: about by harsh interventions, harsh interviewing styles, so literally beating somebody, 75 00:05:16,760 --> 00:05:21,560 Speaker 3: assaulting them, depriving the depriving them of food, you know, 76 00:05:21,880 --> 00:05:29,039 Speaker 3: for days, electric shock treatment, all sorts of deprivation, and. 77 00:05:30,600 --> 00:05:32,640 Speaker 1: That level of coercion. 78 00:05:34,000 --> 00:05:38,200 Speaker 3: Has high incidents of people agreeing to whatever's put to 79 00:05:38,240 --> 00:05:40,000 Speaker 3: them because they just can't take it anymore. 80 00:05:40,440 --> 00:05:42,080 Speaker 1: And the belief is so they go. 81 00:05:42,120 --> 00:05:46,279 Speaker 3: Into it, denying the offending that as the pressure builds 82 00:05:46,279 --> 00:05:49,880 Speaker 3: and is sustained, they give up and they admit to 83 00:05:49,920 --> 00:05:52,320 Speaker 3: whatever's been put in front of them under the belief 84 00:05:52,839 --> 00:05:57,320 Speaker 3: that that pressure or that coercion will stop having done that. 85 00:05:57,400 --> 00:06:02,560 Speaker 3: And we used to think that it would be brutality 86 00:06:02,920 --> 00:06:07,200 Speaker 3: that would essentially make people confess in that context. What 87 00:06:07,240 --> 00:06:10,760 Speaker 3: we now know, and we've known for a while now 88 00:06:10,800 --> 00:06:13,920 Speaker 3: through research and experience, is that it could be far 89 00:06:13,960 --> 00:06:18,480 Speaker 3: more subtle than that inducement being offered, a bribe being offered. 90 00:06:20,839 --> 00:06:25,320 Speaker 3: If you confess, this interview can stop and or you 91 00:06:25,360 --> 00:06:27,440 Speaker 3: can get to go home and be with your family. 92 00:06:28,720 --> 00:06:33,039 Speaker 3: Inducements like that can make people admit to all sorts 93 00:06:33,080 --> 00:06:35,359 Speaker 3: of things that later they retract. 94 00:06:36,040 --> 00:06:39,800 Speaker 2: When it comes to I suppose police interviews, where does 95 00:06:39,839 --> 00:06:43,760 Speaker 2: the blind blur I guess when it comes to being 96 00:06:44,320 --> 00:06:49,920 Speaker 2: approachable and cordial versus being a bit too matey, when 97 00:06:49,960 --> 00:06:52,160 Speaker 2: does it blur into coerciveness? 98 00:06:52,200 --> 00:06:55,200 Speaker 3: So to speak, Well, you use the word mate It 99 00:06:55,200 --> 00:06:57,599 Speaker 3: should never be matey police interviews. 100 00:06:57,839 --> 00:06:58,400 Speaker 1: Never matey. 101 00:06:58,680 --> 00:07:01,839 Speaker 3: If the police have reason to believe that somebody is 102 00:07:01,839 --> 00:07:05,000 Speaker 3: a suspect for a crime, and that's the reason that 103 00:07:05,040 --> 00:07:09,760 Speaker 3: they're questioning you, it ought to never be matey. That 104 00:07:09,760 --> 00:07:13,280 Speaker 3: the police have their own processes and so they ought 105 00:07:13,280 --> 00:07:17,040 Speaker 3: to be in uniform. Your bill of rights need to 106 00:07:17,080 --> 00:07:18,960 Speaker 3: be read to you. You need to be very clear 107 00:07:19,000 --> 00:07:21,680 Speaker 3: on that, and part of that is you don't need 108 00:07:21,720 --> 00:07:24,960 Speaker 3: to make a statement, and that's important that you can 109 00:07:25,000 --> 00:07:28,559 Speaker 3: speak to your lawyer without delay, that you understand these 110 00:07:28,560 --> 00:07:34,080 Speaker 3: conditions that the police approach should never be matey. It 111 00:07:34,120 --> 00:07:37,000 Speaker 3: needs to be the lines need to be well to 112 00:07:37,080 --> 00:07:41,280 Speaker 3: find that you are there because you are a suspect 113 00:07:41,360 --> 00:07:47,640 Speaker 3: for X offense, So my view being mate being chummy 114 00:07:48,760 --> 00:07:52,760 Speaker 3: that can create problems of reliability. 115 00:07:52,800 --> 00:07:55,800 Speaker 1: Further down the track, how long. 116 00:07:55,640 --> 00:07:57,840 Speaker 2: Do you think is too long when it comes to 117 00:07:57,960 --> 00:08:02,000 Speaker 2: a police interrogation or propose we're calling them police interviews now. 118 00:08:02,320 --> 00:08:06,840 Speaker 3: I mean, look, I read police interviews most weeks of 119 00:08:06,880 --> 00:08:11,400 Speaker 3: my career, not for this purpose, not necessarily because there's 120 00:08:11,480 --> 00:08:15,160 Speaker 3: questions about the reliability of confessions, but just to read 121 00:08:15,200 --> 00:08:19,920 Speaker 3: the evidential interviews that an offender or complainant has made. 122 00:08:20,440 --> 00:08:26,200 Speaker 3: And I have to say that overwhelmingly I see excellent 123 00:08:26,240 --> 00:08:31,680 Speaker 3: police processes in their questioning, and they take great care 124 00:08:32,080 --> 00:08:39,599 Speaker 3: around instructing the suspect around their rights. So what we 125 00:08:39,679 --> 00:08:42,760 Speaker 3: call the Bora rights there the museum full of rights, 126 00:08:43,960 --> 00:08:48,760 Speaker 3: and they have regular breaks. And I don't think an 127 00:08:48,800 --> 00:08:51,200 Speaker 3: interview should go on for hours. It shouldn't go one 128 00:08:51,240 --> 00:08:55,280 Speaker 3: if it's obvious that the suspect is fatigued. But often 129 00:08:55,600 --> 00:08:58,640 Speaker 3: there's obviously an asymmetry of power. If you're in a 130 00:08:58,800 --> 00:09:04,040 Speaker 3: police interview and you could ask somebody, you know, how 131 00:09:04,080 --> 00:09:05,400 Speaker 3: are you Are you going okay? 132 00:09:05,520 --> 00:09:06,600 Speaker 1: You're happy to continue? 133 00:09:06,840 --> 00:09:11,120 Speaker 3: And the person might say yes, yes, I'm happy to continue, 134 00:09:10,840 --> 00:09:13,240 Speaker 3: but that they are doing that, they're saying that to 135 00:09:13,280 --> 00:09:18,000 Speaker 3: try and please the interviewer. I think it's a good 136 00:09:18,040 --> 00:09:21,480 Speaker 3: process for the police to insist on breaks and say, look, 137 00:09:21,559 --> 00:09:24,440 Speaker 3: we'll stop now and offer the person you know, a 138 00:09:24,520 --> 00:09:27,360 Speaker 3: drink or coffee or smoke if they do and just 139 00:09:27,720 --> 00:09:30,360 Speaker 3: have a break. And in my experience, the police are 140 00:09:30,440 --> 00:09:35,280 Speaker 3: quite good at doing that and institutes reasonable breaks. But 141 00:09:35,400 --> 00:09:37,120 Speaker 3: I don't think an interview should go one for hours. 142 00:09:37,160 --> 00:09:39,360 Speaker 3: I don't think it should go on late into the night. 143 00:09:40,000 --> 00:09:46,040 Speaker 3: Definitely shouldn't have gone overnight. Fatigue and the like can 144 00:09:46,080 --> 00:09:48,440 Speaker 3: be an impediment to a good interview. 145 00:09:55,640 --> 00:09:56,000 Speaker 1: Go ahead. 146 00:09:56,000 --> 00:09:59,080 Speaker 4: It's four declamatory sentences followed by a question for a 147 00:09:59,120 --> 00:10:02,960 Speaker 4: total of fifty seven words. Okay, it's look. It obviously 148 00:10:03,000 --> 00:10:04,920 Speaker 4: starts with you the right to remain silent. I know 149 00:10:04,960 --> 00:10:08,680 Speaker 4: you've heard them beforn, and then I think it sounds 150 00:10:08,720 --> 00:10:14,320 Speaker 4: something like, yeah, well the thing, yeah, oh right, do 151 00:10:14,360 --> 00:10:16,800 Speaker 4: you have the right to remain an attorney? 152 00:10:17,120 --> 00:10:19,280 Speaker 1: Did you say that you have the right to be 153 00:10:19,320 --> 00:10:21,360 Speaker 1: an attorney. You do have the right to be an 154 00:10:21,360 --> 00:10:25,440 Speaker 1: attorney if you want to do so. 155 00:10:25,559 --> 00:10:29,400 Speaker 2: You mentioned something. What rights do you have when you 156 00:10:29,480 --> 00:10:33,320 Speaker 2: are being interviewed or interrogated by police? So you have 157 00:10:33,360 --> 00:10:36,440 Speaker 2: the right to remain silent? Is that just not in 158 00:10:36,480 --> 00:10:37,000 Speaker 2: the movies? 159 00:10:38,320 --> 00:10:41,439 Speaker 3: It's definitely not in the movies. So you don't need 160 00:10:41,480 --> 00:10:43,839 Speaker 3: to make a statement. And you can start to make 161 00:10:43,880 --> 00:10:46,760 Speaker 3: a statement and then decide that you want to stop 162 00:10:47,000 --> 00:10:52,240 Speaker 3: making that statement, and that is okay. You can ask 163 00:10:52,360 --> 00:10:57,200 Speaker 3: to speak to a lawyer at any time and without delay, 164 00:10:57,360 --> 00:11:01,439 Speaker 3: and in private. If you're a child, if you are 165 00:11:02,840 --> 00:11:07,640 Speaker 3: sixteen or under, you can have a support person in 166 00:11:07,679 --> 00:11:10,040 Speaker 3: there with you of your choosing. Doesn't need to be 167 00:11:10,080 --> 00:11:12,800 Speaker 3: your parents to be somebody of your choosing. 168 00:11:13,160 --> 00:11:17,200 Speaker 2: When it comes to false confessions, what do you think 169 00:11:17,240 --> 00:11:21,000 Speaker 2: are some really good examples It could be from overseas 170 00:11:21,080 --> 00:11:24,120 Speaker 2: or even here in New Zealand, about how things have 171 00:11:24,200 --> 00:11:26,040 Speaker 2: gone wrong and how they've been fixed. 172 00:11:26,840 --> 00:11:30,079 Speaker 3: Before I even talk about toilples, I'll tell you how 173 00:11:30,840 --> 00:11:34,320 Speaker 3: how I got into the area. But you have to 174 00:11:34,360 --> 00:11:37,320 Speaker 3: remember a couple of things I prefer to call in 175 00:11:37,360 --> 00:11:41,400 Speaker 3: my working practice, I refer to them as retracted confessions, 176 00:11:41,960 --> 00:11:47,239 Speaker 3: not false confessions, because just because a confession is retracted, 177 00:11:47,760 --> 00:11:52,720 Speaker 3: it doesn't mean it's false. And ultimately, you know that 178 00:11:52,800 --> 00:11:56,160 Speaker 3: the court is the decision maker, and it's for the 179 00:11:56,200 --> 00:12:00,480 Speaker 3: courts to decide whether somebody's statement is unreliable not and 180 00:12:00,600 --> 00:12:03,360 Speaker 3: ultimately whether it is false or not if it goes 181 00:12:03,400 --> 00:12:05,719 Speaker 3: that far. That's not the role of an expert in 182 00:12:05,800 --> 00:12:08,640 Speaker 3: somebody such as myself. What I do is I give 183 00:12:08,640 --> 00:12:12,000 Speaker 3: an opinion on it. Then I give an opinion on 184 00:12:12,080 --> 00:12:15,200 Speaker 3: a balance of probabilities. The other thing is that when 185 00:12:15,240 --> 00:12:19,319 Speaker 3: I give an opinion one way another and whether I'm 186 00:12:19,360 --> 00:12:25,120 Speaker 3: saying it is in my opinion reliable or unreliable, the 187 00:12:25,160 --> 00:12:27,839 Speaker 3: opposite side, so whether I'm instructed by the crime or 188 00:12:27,880 --> 00:12:30,360 Speaker 3: the defense, the other side will have the opportunity to 189 00:12:30,360 --> 00:12:34,160 Speaker 3: get their own expert to review my work and give 190 00:12:34,200 --> 00:12:36,880 Speaker 3: their own opinion. And that can even happen as many 191 00:12:36,880 --> 00:12:40,440 Speaker 3: as two, three, four or five experts, you know, in 192 00:12:40,480 --> 00:12:43,480 Speaker 3: a case. So that's I think really important for people 193 00:12:43,480 --> 00:12:46,800 Speaker 3: to understand. It's not that you get one expert and 194 00:12:47,640 --> 00:12:51,000 Speaker 3: they decide. We give an opinion and that's open to 195 00:12:51,400 --> 00:12:55,040 Speaker 3: scrutiny and cross examination. Like it's always the court that 196 00:12:55,480 --> 00:12:59,280 Speaker 3: will make the decisions on that. But look that there's 197 00:12:59,280 --> 00:13:03,319 Speaker 3: been a lot of high profile cases nationally and internationally. 198 00:13:03,640 --> 00:13:06,199 Speaker 3: Probably the highest profile one here in New Zealand is 199 00:13:06,240 --> 00:13:14,920 Speaker 3: the Taina Poorer case where he made various statements that. 200 00:13:12,679 --> 00:13:14,079 Speaker 1: Were found unreliable. 201 00:13:14,920 --> 00:13:18,040 Speaker 3: In the UK, I was always interested in cases from 202 00:13:18,080 --> 00:13:22,559 Speaker 3: the seventies. You've got the Guildford Four, the Birmingham Six, 203 00:13:23,080 --> 00:13:25,520 Speaker 3: and these were very high profile cases at the time 204 00:13:25,559 --> 00:13:29,120 Speaker 3: where these individuals were accused of IRA bombings and they 205 00:13:29,240 --> 00:13:35,800 Speaker 3: had very dubious police interviewing, the elicited admissions that were 206 00:13:35,800 --> 00:13:39,360 Speaker 3: then retracted that these people were found guilties and years 207 00:13:39,360 --> 00:13:42,880 Speaker 3: in jail. I think the Birmingham six sixteen years in 208 00:13:42,920 --> 00:13:49,719 Speaker 3: prison always maintained the innocence and then eventually those convictions 209 00:13:49,840 --> 00:13:53,280 Speaker 3: were overturned. But the way I got into this in 210 00:13:53,320 --> 00:13:58,440 Speaker 3: New Zealand was very early on in my career. I 211 00:13:58,520 --> 00:14:01,720 Speaker 3: had a routine assessment looking at the issue of fitness 212 00:14:01,720 --> 00:14:06,440 Speaker 3: to stand trial and this person had been accused of 213 00:14:07,520 --> 00:14:11,719 Speaker 3: child sexual offending. But what was really interesting was he 214 00:14:11,840 --> 00:14:15,079 Speaker 3: turned up to the police station on his own accord 215 00:14:15,800 --> 00:14:20,360 Speaker 3: and he made these disclosures and the police of course 216 00:14:20,480 --> 00:14:23,120 Speaker 3: did what they had to do. And part of their 217 00:14:23,160 --> 00:14:26,320 Speaker 3: investigation is they went to speak to the complainant and 218 00:14:26,360 --> 00:14:31,120 Speaker 3: the complainant said that not only had this never happened, 219 00:14:31,560 --> 00:14:35,280 Speaker 3: she didn't even know who the accused was, had never 220 00:14:35,360 --> 00:14:38,120 Speaker 3: come across him, and of course they checked all of 221 00:14:38,160 --> 00:14:44,160 Speaker 3: that out, that they felt that because he'd made this admission, 222 00:14:44,880 --> 00:14:49,760 Speaker 3: that they had to charge him. And it was early 223 00:14:49,880 --> 00:14:54,400 Speaker 3: in my career, you know, and the circumstances of this 224 00:14:54,440 --> 00:14:58,640 Speaker 3: whole thing concerned me, and I remember speaking to the 225 00:14:58,680 --> 00:15:00,680 Speaker 3: law and said, look, in terms of his fitness to 226 00:15:00,720 --> 00:15:05,280 Speaker 3: stand trial, there are no issues there. He's a bit 227 00:15:05,360 --> 00:15:10,000 Speaker 3: to stand trial, but I'm concerned about the reliability of 228 00:15:10,040 --> 00:15:13,840 Speaker 3: this admission. And that lawyer, who's very good, got his 229 00:15:13,880 --> 00:15:17,560 Speaker 3: own independent expert to look into this issue. And what 230 00:15:17,600 --> 00:15:19,760 Speaker 3: it was found was, you know, this person had boadline 231 00:15:19,760 --> 00:15:22,920 Speaker 3: intellectual functioning, so from memory, I don't think he had 232 00:15:22,960 --> 00:15:25,640 Speaker 3: intellectual disability, that he wasn't far from it. So he 233 00:15:25,680 --> 00:15:30,880 Speaker 3: had cognitive limitations. And basically he was living with some 234 00:15:31,000 --> 00:15:37,120 Speaker 3: friends and they I think there'd been some issues on 235 00:15:37,160 --> 00:15:41,120 Speaker 3: their side in terms of their own offending histories, and 236 00:15:41,680 --> 00:15:44,600 Speaker 3: they had said to him he'd mentioned a girl or 237 00:15:44,640 --> 00:15:47,800 Speaker 3: somebody that he'd seen, and they basically said to him 238 00:15:48,240 --> 00:15:51,000 Speaker 3: that they put the accusations to him and said that 239 00:15:51,040 --> 00:15:53,400 Speaker 3: the right thing for him to do would be for 240 00:15:53,480 --> 00:15:56,320 Speaker 3: him to go and make this admission, and he did 241 00:15:56,360 --> 00:16:00,840 Speaker 3: that to please them, to be part of the friendship circle. 242 00:16:01,240 --> 00:16:03,520 Speaker 3: And it was that case, as I say, very early 243 00:16:03,560 --> 00:16:05,440 Speaker 3: on in my career that got me interested in this 244 00:16:05,600 --> 00:16:08,280 Speaker 3: and that was why I started reading, you know, quite 245 00:16:08,280 --> 00:16:13,600 Speaker 3: extensively about it, and it sort of became an interest 246 00:16:13,640 --> 00:16:16,680 Speaker 3: theory of mine and have been unvoult in furious cases. 247 00:16:16,400 --> 00:16:20,240 Speaker 1: Over the years. Than that. Thanks for joining us, most welcome. 248 00:16:22,960 --> 00:16:26,200 Speaker 2: That's it for this episode of The Front Page. You 249 00:16:26,240 --> 00:16:30,120 Speaker 2: can read more about today's stories and extensive news coverage 250 00:16:30,160 --> 00:16:34,240 Speaker 2: at enzdherld dot co dot nz. The Front Page is 251 00:16:34,320 --> 00:16:37,720 Speaker 2: produced by Jane Ye and Richard Martin, who is also 252 00:16:37,920 --> 00:16:42,400 Speaker 2: our editor. I'm Chelsea Daniels. Subscribe to the Front Page 253 00:16:42,440 --> 00:16:46,040 Speaker 2: on iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts, and tune 254 00:16:46,080 --> 00:16:49,120 Speaker 2: in tomorrow for another look behind the headlines.