How To Make A Murderer
How do you make a murderer? Well, given our nation’s history – it doesn’t seem too difficult. Let’s break it down step by step –
STEP 1: Find someone who may (or may not) fit the description of the crime
STEP 2: Interrogate and manipulate them until they submit to your demands
STEP 3: Withhold exculpatory evidence
STEP 4: Use this evidence to confuse and influence a jury
STEP 5: Convict
The popular Netflix series, Making a Murderer, has brought attention to the overwhelming police, prosecutorial and law enforcement misconduct often displayed by those who are called to “serve and protect” our nation.
The series was released on December 18th, 2015 – just 2 days after I graduated law school and received my Juris Doctorate degree. Criminal law is my passion and while pursuing my legal education I focused heavily on social and racial injustices. While studying for the NYS Bar Exam, I chose to watch the series, rather than sleep. (Anybody who has taken the bar knows that your day consists of two things – STUDY & SLEEP). I loaded up on caffeine and watched all ten episodes in two nights. My mind couldn’t wrap around what I was watching – I was glued to the TV and mildly obsessed with the prevailing injustices that were happening. The most shocking and disturbing part of it all: this wasn’t the first time law enforcement made a murderer and will likely not be the last.
In 1987, Walter McMillian, an African-American man having with no prior criminal record and known in the community as a hard-working gentleman, was convicted of murdering a white woman and sentenced to death. Walter’s conviction was solely based on the testimony of one white man, Ralph Myers – a known criminal in the community – who was awaiting trial for a murder he did in fact commit. Ralph Myers was promised by law enforcement that if he testified against Walter, the death penalty would be off the table and in the alternative, he would receive life in prison. With that type of pressure, of course Myers - AGREED. There was NO physical evidence of the crime, NO DNA, NO motive and evidence that directly contradicted all of Myers testimony – yet and STILL, an all-white-jury in a predominantly white county convicted Walter. The prosecutor withheld crucial evidence from the defendant’s attorney and after six years on death row – Walter was released and exonerated in 1993. Ralph recanted his testimony and admitted that the entire story was a lie – coerced by the law enforcement agents of the county.
Prosecutorial discretion – “the power to choose whether and how to punish a person who has violated the law” – when abused is a threat to our society, nation and most importantly, our children.
Brendan Dassey, one of the stars in “Making a Murderer”, was an intellectually disabled 16-year old boy, when we “confessed” to assisting his Uncle, Steven Avery, in the rape, murder and dismemberment of Theresa Halbach. Brendan is noted for having an extremely low I.Q and taking special education classes while enrolled in school. Throughout the series, although Brendan’s confession was recanted and his story changed numerous times – two things remained consistent: his vulnerability and confusion. There was no DNA evidence to support Brendan’s theory and whatever physical evidence brought forth by the Prosecution was tainted by law enforcement members. Brendan is currently serving life in prison for the crime and efforts are currently being made to overturn the conviction.
In 1988, Marty Tankleff, a 17-year old boy, confessed to stabbing and beating his parents after being subjected to intense police interrogation without an attorney or any parental guidance. When police arrived at the crime scene, the detective suggested that Tankleff was not “upset” enough and instantly identified him as the prime suspect in the case. The officer interrogating Tankleff told him that all the evidence pointed to him and even that one of his parents, before dying, named him as the culprit. All this information was, of course, fictitious. In Frazier v. Cupp, a United States Supreme Court Case – the court affirmed the legality of deceptive interrogation methods used by police officers (they can lie and tell you whatever they want to get you to confess!).
Tankleff – terrified, distraught and having just lost his beloved parents, confessed to committing the murder. There was no physical evidence to link Tankleff to the crime – just his confession, which was rendered sufficient for the jury to convict and sentence him to life in prison. When DNA evidence revealed the true killer nearly twenty years later, Marty was exonerated in 2007 and decided to go to law school.
Brendan Dassey and Marty Tankleff are examples of how easily an adolescent (as well as an adult) can be coerced or manipulated into confessing to a crime that they didn’t commit.
Friends, family and members of the community – the 5th amendment of our constitution provides that you “HAVE THE RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT” - ANYthing and EVERYthing you say CAN and WILL be used against you in a court of law, that means, when you are in police custody – SHUT UP. Police tactics are persuasive and sometimes down-right evil, they are not your friends, your sentence will not be reduced if you comply with their demands, and you will not be going home afterwards. The pressure of being interrogated by a law enforcement member is intolerable for an adult – let alone a young teenager, whose behavior and temperament is similar to that of a child. It is not necessary for you to have been arrested and formally read your rights to be deemed “in police custody” – instead, the standard for determining whether or not you are being held in police custody is “would a reasonable person in the same circumstances feel like they could not get up and walk away?” – If an officer picks you up for what they often times refer to as “questioning” – you have the right, whether you are guilty or innocent, to REFUSE to answer any questions that may (and likely will) incriminate you in some manner. Any statements given while speaking to an officer, prior to receiving your formal warnings (being read your Miranda rights) or objecting to wanting a lawyer present, are deemed to be voluntary and given freely – and will be used against you in future court proceedings.
Minors & young adults, these are the people that worry me the most. Our criminal justice is “supposed” to protect our children – law enforcement is supposed to employ methods that balance an interview subjects age against the other circumstances surrounding the case – including, but not limited to, the crime being alleged, where the interview is taking place, and whether a parent has been contacted. An adult interrogator has the mental capacity to brainwash a juvenile offender (or an intellectually disabled adult) and assist them in developing a fabricated account of what took place. This is not to conclude that any alleged disclosure brought forth from a child is unequivocally false – rather their testimony and confessions must be scrutinized considerably more carefully than that of an adult. The unfortunate and disheartening news is that a police officer is allowed to freely approach children and question them about their involvement in a crime – and they are not required to obtain permission before doing so.
So, how do we prevent situations like Brendan Dassey, and so many others, from happening in the future – well, there is no easy answer to that question. My first and most important advice: EDUCATE YOURSELF!
If a child(or adult) is detained or arrested – the adolescent may request to call their parents, speak to an attorney, contact their school teacher or refuse to answer any questions. But a minor has to KNOW that they in fact do have that right.
Confessions are powerful and very persuasive evidence – often times impossible for a jury panel to ostracize. With the current events, I fear that our nation is taking steps backward instead of forward. Change starts with US – education is the key component to rectifying these prodigious circumstances of injustice. Our nation needs JUSTICE – COMPASSION – FAITH – HOPE! We have critical work in front of us.
With Love,
Curly.Esquire
