Corroboration At Time 2 Case Study

So even if you have an alibi witness may have problems if you give a false confession. The study that Marion did was to have two people one participant put with one random worker. They would work on puzzles and questions with limited communication. Then when doing a puzzle a third part would walk in and say something has been stolen. The results are as follows, “Across all conditions and irrespective of corroboration strength, 32 of the 60 participants (53.33%) who corroborated the alibi at Time 1 maintained their support at Time 2. A two-way chi-square test revealed a strong effect of our manipulation on the likelihood of corroboration at Time 2” (Marion 68). This study shows that only a little over half of the alibi witness stuck with their story from the start even after the people had confessed. To continue on they participant would be an alibi for each other. Then the random person would confess that they had stolen the item. Then they would go in and ask the other person if they really had believed they didn’t steal anything. So 53% percent of the participants stuck with the story that they were doing puzzles and they couldn’t have stole something. This is a big disparity and shows that people will second guess even though they had been working together. …show more content…
This also shows that police or the person asking questions can get your alibi witness to recant because they can confuse them enough to think you might have committed the act in question. So in any case a false confession can doom you in court and in the eyes of your alibi witnesses. This is very problematic because we are putting people in prison that should not be there.
Remorse in oral and handwritten false