uiuiui, ich lese grad das transkript der befragung eines experten bei der verhandlung von jessie misskelley, einem der west memphis three.
sowas hier ist doch echt mal merkwürdig, da lässt das gericht einen sozialpsychologen mit dem spezialgebiet erzwungene geständnisse als sachverständigen zu und dann darf der seine meinung nicht sagen:
“THE COURT: It’s just like the Johnson case on the rape of that child. I’m going to allow him to testify right up to the point of where he’s giving an opinion or inference that it was involuntary — that it was coerced.”
“THE COURT: Yes, I’ll let you ask those questions. …. But the difference is you’re asking him whether or not this was involuntary and allow him to say, In my opinion it was involuntary well, what does involuntary mean? Does that mean the State –or the officers did something impermissible, illegal — there are a number of things in the psychological area and the sociological area that the police could do that are perfectly permissible. Psychological techniques are not necessarily improper or wrong. From a psychologist’ s standpoint, he might say, Well, by using these subtle techniques they caused him to — to confess. That doesn’t mean that they’re involuntary. It means that they’re good techniques. So it means a lot of different things, and I’m not—”
au backe.




