ISSN : 2093-3843
The Statement evidence is an important method of proof in the criminal investigation and trial. Under certain conditions set by Korean Criminal Procedure Law, paper records of interrogations are admissible in criminal courts. However, it is shown that distortions are ever-present in paper records. Therefore, this study attempted to examine the effect of the investigator’s belief about the veracity of a suspect on distortions of paper records. Ninety police investigators were randomly allocated into one of the three conditions(‘guilty belief’, ‘innocent belief’, ‘neutral belief’), and all the investigators were then asked to document a paper record while watching a prefilmed interrogation interview of the crime. The results showed that (1) the investigator’s belief had significant effects on distortions. (2) All groups did more commissions than omissions. (3) matters subject to interrogation also had significant effects on distortions. In the conclusion, implications and limitations of the study were disscussed.
권영법 (2012). 현행 조서관련 규정에 관한 비판적인 고찰: 비교법적인 고찰을 통한 현행 규정의 검토와 대안의 모색을 중심으로. 저스티스, 131, 202-242.
고민조, 박주용 (2019). 피고인의 성격증거(Character Evidence)가 사실인정에 미치는 영향. 한국법심리학회지: 법, 10(3), 215- 235.
김인회 (2018). 형사소송법 제2판, 서울: 피앤씨미디어.
김현숙 (2008). 피의자신문조서와 영상녹화물의 증거능력에 관한 연구. 서울대학교 박사학위논문.
박노섭, 이동희, 이윤, 장윤식 (2014). 범죄수사학. 용인: 경찰대학 출판부.
박노섭 (2004a). 수사절차상 신문과 비디오 녹화제도. 형사정책, 16(1), 103-144.
박노섭 (2004b). 형사소송법상 참고인 진술의 문제점. 경찰학연구, 6, 46-70.
박노섭 (2007). 개정형사소송법상 조서재판위험성에 대한 소고. 경찰학연구, 7(2), 9-30.
서보학 (2008). 개정형사소송법에 의한 수사조서 및 영상녹화물의 증거능력. 사법발전재단 사법, 1(3), 161-195.
신동운 (2014). 신형사소송법 제5판. 서울: 법문사.
엄명용 (2004). 사법경찰관리의 진술증거수집 효율화 방안: 진술녹화제도 도입에 대한 사법경찰관리와 피의자의 태도조사. 서울: 한국형사정책연구원.
이 윤 (2015). 수사관의 용의자 면담유형 분류 및 수사면담유형 평가척도의 개발. 한림대학교 박사학위논문.
이종엽 (2010). 법심리학적 관점에서 본 진술증거의 평가방법. 저스티스, 120, 172-222.
이형근 (2016). 피의자신문조서 왜곡의 형성과 영향: 조서의 작성, 정정 및 평가 단계에 관한 실험연구. 한림대학교 박사학위논문.
이형근 (2019). 조서제도 관련 형사소송법 개정 논의. 형사정책연구소식, 149, 30-34.
이형근 (2020a). 피의자 진술의 청취 및 기록에 관한 연구: 신문, 조서 및 영상녹화의 운용론을 중심으로. 서울대학교 박사학위논문.
이형근 (2020b). 제정 수사준칙상 피의자신문 이전 절차에 관한 고찰: 출석요구, 변호인의 신문참여, 사전신문 문제를 중심으로. 형사정책연구, 31(3), 95-133.
이형근 (2020c). 제정 수사준칙상 조사․신문․면담 관련 조항에 관한 고찰: 심야조사, 별건조사, 사전신문 문제를 중심으로. 형사법연구, 32(3), 143-176.
이형근, 백윤석 (2019). 피의자신문조서의 왜곡에 대한 증거법적 평가방향: 왜곡에 대한 일반인과 변호사의 인식 비교연구. 경찰학연구, 19(4), 133-164.
이형근, 조은경 (2014). 피의자신문조서의 왜곡 유형과 정도에 관한 연구. 경찰학연구, 14(2), 29-53.
장민환 (2014). 증거의 종류와 증거의 탄력성이 수사관의 유죄판단에 미치는 영향. 한림대학교 석사학위논문.
조 국 (2008). 검사작성 피의자신문조서와 영상녹화물의 증거능력. 저스티스, 107, 171-192.
조정래 (2011). 수사과정상 피의자진술을 현출하는 방법의 한계와 보완: 영상녹화물의 활용을 중심으로. 경북대학교 법학논고, 36, 329-360.
Caso, L., Gnisci, A., Vrij, A., & Mann, S. (2005). Processes underlying deception: an empirical analysis of truth and lies when manipulating the stakes. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profile, 2(3), 195-202.
Coulthard, M. (2002). Whose voice is it? Invented and concealed dialogue in written records of verbal evidence produced by the police. In J. Cotterill, (Ed.), Language in the legal process (pp. 19-34). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Drizin, S. A., & Leo, R. A. (2004). The problem of false confessions in the post-DNA world. North Carolina Law Review, 82, 891-1007.
Granhag, P. A., & Strömwall, L. A. (2002). Repeated interrogations: Verbal and non-verbal cues to deception. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16(3), 243-257.
Gregory, A. H., Compo, N. S., Vertefeuille, L., & Zambruski, G. (2011). A comparison of US police interviewers’ notes with their subsequent reports. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 8(2), 203-215.
Hartwig, M. (2005). Interrogating to detect deception and truth: Effects of strategic use of evidence. PhD thesis, University of Gothenburg, Department of Psychology.
Hartwig, M., Granhag, P. A., Strömwall, L., & Kronkvist, O. (2006). Strategic use of evidence during police interrogations: When training to detect deception work. Law and Human Behavior, 30, 603-619.
Kassin, S. M., & Fong, C. T. (1999). “I’m innocent!” Effects of training on judgments of truth and deception in the interrogation room. Law and Human Behavior, 23, 499-516.
Kassin, S. M., Goldstein, C. J., & Savitsky, K. (2003). Behavioral confirmation in the interrogation room: On the dangers of presuming guilt. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 187-203.
Komter, M. L. (2006). From talk to text: The interactional construction of a police record. Research on Language and Social interaction, 39(3), 201-228.
Lamb, M. E., Orbach, Y., Sternberg, K. J., Hershkowitz, I., & Horowitz, D. (2000). Accuracy of investigators’ verbatim notes of their forensic interviews with alleged child abuse victims. Law and Human Behavior, 24(6), 699-708.
Leo, R. A., & Davis, D. (2010). From false confession to wrongful conviction: Seven psychological precesses. The Journal of Psychiatry & Law, 38, 9-54.
Meissner, C. A., & Kassin, S. M. (2002). “He’s guilty!”: Investigator bias in judgments of truth and deception. Law & Human Behavior, 26, 469-480.
Meissner, C. A., & Kassin, S. M. (2004). “You’re guilty, so just confess?! Cognitive and behavioral confirmation biases in the interrogation room. In G. D. Lassiter (Ed.), Interrogations, confessions and entrapment (pp. 85-106). New York: Kluwer Academic.
Ofshe, R., & Leo, R. A. (1997a). The social psychology of police interrogation: The theory and classification of true and false confessions. Studies in Law, Politics and Society, 16, 189-251.
Ofshe, R., & Leo, R. A. (1997b). The decision to confess falsely: Rational choice and irrational action. Denver University Law Review, 74, 979-1122.
Ofshe, R., & Leo, R. A. (1998). Consequences of false confessions: Deprivations of liberty and miscarriages of justice in the age of psychological interrogation. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 88(2), 429-296.
Spranca, M., Minsk, E., & Baron, J. (1991). Omission and commission in judgment and choice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 76-105.
Strömwall, L. A., Hartwig, M., & Granhag, P. A. (2006). To act truthfully: Nonverbal behaviour and strategies during a police interrogation. Psychology, Crime & Law, 12(2), 207-219.
van Charldorp, T. C. (2012). From police interrogation to police record. Phd thesis, Vrije University.
Vrij, A., Edward, K., & Bull, R. (2001). Stereotypical verbal and nonverbal responses while deceiving others. Personality and social psychology bulletin, 27(7), 899-909.
Vrij, A., & Mann, S. (2006). Criteria-based content analysis: An empirical test of its underlying processes. Psychology, Crime & Law, 12(4), 337-349.
Vrij, A., Mann, S., & Fisher, R. P. (2006). Information-gathering vs accusatory interview style: Individual differences in respondents’ experiences. Personality and Individual Differences, 41(4), 589-599.
Vrij, A., Mann, S. A., Fisher, R. P., Leal, S., Milne, R., & Bull, R. (2008). Increasing cognitive load to facilitate lie detection: the benefit of recalling an event in reverse order. Law and human behavior, 32(3), 253-265.
Vrij, A., Semin, G. R., & Bull, R. (1996). Insight into behavior displayed during deception. Human Communication Research, 22(4), 544-562.
White, C. H., & Burgoon, J. K. (2001). Adaptation and communicative design. Human Communication Research, 27(1), 9-37.
