top of page


Miranda v. Arizona: Why the Fifth Amendment Still Shapes Modern Interrogation
Miranda v. Arizona reshaped modern interrogation by recognizing that custodial questioning creates psychological pressure that can compel statements. The Supreme Court held that the Fifth Amendment requires suspects to be advised of their right to remain silent and to an attorney before custodial interrogation. These protections safeguard voluntary statements, reduce coercion, and preserve the integrity and reliability of evidence obtained during interviews.

C. Edward
Dec 12, 20244 min read


False Confessions: A Look into What They Are and Their Historical Context
False confessions are not rare anomalies. They are predictable outcomes of coercive, accusatory interviewing and pseudoscientific lie-detection practices. This article examines the history, psychology, and risk factors behind false confessions and their role in wrongful convictions. It contrasts confession-driven interrogation with Science-Based Interviewing, an evidence-based approach that prioritizes reliable information, corroboration, and sound questioning to reduce inves

C. Edward
Sep 24, 20239 min read


Brown v. Mississippi: A Landmark Case That Ended the Third Degree in Interrogation (1936)
Brown v. Mississippi marked a turning point: confessions obtained through brutal interrogation violate due process and are inadmissible.

Christian Cory
Nov 17, 20228 min read
bottom of page