Not Born Yesterday

Home > Other > Not Born Yesterday > Page 23
Not Born Yesterday Page 23

by Hugo Mercier


  unjustified.14

  By default, it makes sense that confessions should be believed.

  But why aren’t they discounted when made under pressure?

  As a matter of fact, they are, when the pressures are strong and

  184 ch ap t er 12

  transparent. Psychologists Saul Kassin and Lawrence Wrights-

  man presented participants with the transcript of a trial in which

  the accusation mostly rested on the defendant’s confession.15

  When the confession was obtained after a threat— that the defen-

  dant, if he didn’t confess, would be treated poorly and get a maxi-

  mum sentence—it was essentially ignored by the participants.

  Unfortunately, the people who ultimately have to judge the

  convincingness of a confession often do not have access to all the

  relevant information.16 It used to be relatively easy, and it still is

  in many jurisdictions, for interrogators to pressure suspects with-

  out the judge or the jurors knowing about it. It is also difficult

  for judges and jurors to fully grasp the suspect’s emotional state,

  the strain exerted by hours of close interrogation, or the yearn-

  ing for any slight reprieve. The relative paucity of information

  about the pressures bearing on suspects means that judges and

  jurors easily revert to the default stance of accepting self-

  incriminating statements.

  Yet most, if not all, of these exculpatory ele ments are known

  to the interrogators who have obtained the confessions, and that

  doesn’t stop them from accepting the confessions. As a rule,

  when interrogators seek to obtain a confession, their prior inqui-

  ries have led them to believe the suspect is guilty. At this stage the

  interrogators’ goal, as they see it, might be less to ascertain guilt

  than to build a convincing case. As a result, they are likely to use

  their mechanisms of open vigilance to gauge their chances that

  the confession will be accepted by judge and jury, rather than to

  evaluate it critically. Given that judge and jury likely won’t be

  aware of many of the ele ments that would make the confession

  less persuasive, it makes sense that the interrogators deem the

  confession acceptable as wel . Moreover, less obvious pressures—

  raising the suspect’s expectation of leniency, say— aren’t con-

  sidered by juries even when they are known: on their own,

  w i t c he s ’ c o nf e s si o ns 185

  such pressures don’t appear sufficient to explain why someone

  would admit to a heinous act and risk years in jail.17 As long

  as the most egregious violations of the suspect’s rights aren’t

  recorded, it is relatively easy for interrogators to provide con-

  vincing confessions.

  If confessions (true and false) already play an impor tant role

  in securing criminal convictions in the United States, in coun-

  tries with more lax interrogation standards, or stronger social

  pressures, confessions can prop up the entire system of criminal

  law. In Japan, more than 99 percent of cases sent to trial in a year

  can end up in convictions, with around 90 percent of convictions

  based on confessions.18 Although it is impossible to tell how

  many of these confessions are false, some particularly egregious

  cases are well known. An investigation in the late 1970s targeted

  thirty- six minors accused of leading a violent biker gang. By the

  end of the interrogations, thirty- one of them had confessed to

  being one of the three gang leaders.19 Stil , if Japa nese suspects

  sometimes plead guilty to breaking laws they haven’t broken, at

  least they are human laws, not the laws of physics— which

  witches routinely confess to transgressing.

  Extraordinary Confessions and the Madness

  of Witches

  The Salem witch trials, related in Arthur Miller’s famous play The

  Crucible, started with Tituba, an enslaved woman who had been

  brought from the Barbados to Salem in 1680, and who was ac-

  cused of bewitching two young girls. She barely both ered deny-

  ing it. Soon confessions poured out of her like fantastic curses.

  She had been “rid[ing] upon a stick.”20 Sarah Osborne, one of

  her accomplices, had a creature with “wings and two legs and a

  head like a woman,” as wel as a kind of werewolf (“a thing all over

  186 ch ap t er 12

  hairy, all the face hairy, and a long nose, . . . and goes upright like

  a man”).21 Tituba would end up implicating hundreds of people,

  fueling the most famous witch hunt in American history.

  As we can safely assume Tituba’s confession to be false, we

  could ask the same questions as we did previously: Why did she

  confess? And why was she believed? However, given the ex-

  traordinary nature of the charges, we must start by wondering

  why she was accused at all.

  Although witchcraft beliefs vary from one culture to the next,

  the core concept that some people are able to hurt others through

  super natural means is extraordinarily common across a wide

  range of socie ties. As anthropologist E. E. Evans- Pritchard noted

  in his landmark study of witchcraft among the Azande (of Cen-

  tral Africa), a belief in witchcraft does not replace a more com-

  monsensical understanding of causation. In Evans- Pritchard’s

  classic example, a Zande would know that a hut fell down because

  time and termites had gnawed at its pil ars. They would also know

  that the hut fell down at such and such a time, injuring such and

  such individuals who happened to be sitting under it, because

  of a witch (I will use witch here to refer to either gender, as is usu-

  ally done in the anthropological lit er a ture).22

  Why add this layer of intentionality to random events that are

  well captured by other intuitions? It makes sense for our minds

  to overinterpret misfortunes in intentional terms. Better to look

  for a culprit when there was no foul play than to let someone hurt

  us without suspecting anything. After all, some people do bear

  us ill wil , and we often know it. As a result, when something bad

  happens to us, and even more so when we suffer a succession of

  misfortunes, it seems appropriate to look for an agent that might

  have caused them, our enemies being prime suspects.

  Imagine you work in an office and have a serious grudge with

  Aleksander, one of your colleagues. You have already had minor

  w i t c he s ’ c o nf e s si o ns 187

  skirmishes, playing nasty pranks on each other. One day, you

  can’t find your stapler, the drink you had put in the fridge has a

  weird taste, and your computer keeps crashing. Wouldn’t the

  thought that your office nemesis is responsible pop into your

  mind?

  Still, there’s a world between these plausible—if a bit

  paranoid— suspicions and a belief that one is being poisoned by

  stick- riding witches with werewolf sidekicks. Confessions might

  have helped bridge this gap.

  Imagine you’ve become quite persuaded Aleksander is re-

  sponsible for your office trou bles. If he doesn’t care one bit

  about how you perceive him, he will deny (t
ruthfully, let’s

  say) any involvement. But if at some point he needs to make

  peace, his best option might be to get you a new stapler, buy

  you a drink, and fix your computer— which would be taken

  as a confession of guilt, whether he explic itly admits to the

  misdeeds or not.23 Only then could you start to forgive him

  and move on.

  Now, because you have some basic knowledge of medicine if,

  on top of your other misfortunes, you had caught the flu, you

  wouldn’t blame Aleksander for it. But if you did not have that

  knowledge, you might have lumped this extra misfortune with

  the others. If Aleksander had also confessed to making you sick,

  you would then have been tempted to form a belief that some

  people can make others sick at wil .

  This tentative sketch shows how a belief in something like

  witchcraft could emerge from a cycle of suspicion, the need to

  mend fences, and false confessions.24 Stil , confessing to steal-

  ing an officemate’s stapler is one thing, but witches are routinely

  accused of vastly graver offenses, even murder. Why would any-

  one confess if the penalty is, say, being burned at the stake? If it

  is true that this gruesome penalty was common in early modern

  188 ch ap t er 12

  Eu rope, in many socie ties witches who confess receive rather le-

  nient sentences.

  Among the Azande, presumed witches are made aware of the

  accusations against them when a fowl’s wing is placed in front

  of their house. The witch is then expected to take the wing to the

  victim’s house, blow some water on it, confess to the bewitch-

  ing, and apologize.25 The Ashanti (Ghana) ask the witch to make

  a public confession and pay a fine.26 A Banyang (Cameroon) sus-

  pected of being a witch is made to dance at a specific rhythm.27

  Among the Tangu (New Guinea), the witch must compensate

  the victim.28

  There are multiple reasons for keeping the penalties inflicted

  on witches low. Harsh penalties are difficult to implement and

  might lead to retaliation by the accused witches and their allies.

  Confessing not only is often low cost but can also provide some

  advantages. By confessing, a witch can “win mercy and forgive-

  ness.”29 Since many accused witches confess, even without

  threat of duress, it is quite plausible that “confessions are crucial”

  for belief in witchcraft to flourish, as anthropologist Roy Wil is

  argued.30

  Once a belief in witchcraft has become ingrained in a culture,

  it becomes pos si ble to justify punishing a suspected witch even

  in the absence of a confession, making confessions even more

  worthwhile— after all, the whole point of confessing is to be

  treated better, given that others are persuaded we are guilty.31

  A Zuni (Native American) boy was accused of bewitching a

  young girl who had had a seizure after he had touched her hands.

  He knew witchcraft called for the death penalty.32 Just like Tit-

  uba’s, his initial denials proved unconvincing—he would say he

  was innocent, wouldn’t he? And so, instead, the boy made up a

  story of having been taught witchcraft, and he attempted to cure the

  girl. As the trial dragged on, he concocted increasingly baroque

  w i t c he s ’ c o nf e s si o ns 189

  tales of taking on animal forms and kil ing people by spitting cac-

  tus needles at them. He ended his confession by bemoaning the

  recent loss of all his powers. Whether they were amused, fright-

  ened, or impressed by his frankness, the judges freed him.

  Returning to Tituba, she remained in jail for a few months but

  was eventually freed without even being indicted. Indeed, none

  of the women who confessed were among the nineteen who

  hanged in Salem. Even at the height of the witch hunt in England,

  the choice for a witch would often either be “to confess her guilt

  and promise amendment of life at the ecclesiastical courts, or

  [be] removed from the community by imprisonment or death

  at the Assizes.”33

  Given the crimes witches stood accused of, the most remark-

  able aspect of their punishment is its leniency— provided the

  witches confess and make amends. Witches were often let go

  with a confession, the odd ritual, maybe a small fine, even though

  their avowed crimes included making people sick, kil ing them,

  poisoning their crops and cattle, conspiring with the devil, or

  even devouring their own children.34 Indeed, in some cultures,

  such as the Azande, after the confession had been made the witch

  could fully reintegrate into society as if nothing had happened.35

  Presumably, few people would treat someone in this way whom

  they actually saw poisoning their food or eating children.

  In this re spect, beliefs in witchcraft behave like the wild ru-

  mors discussed in chapter 10. People do not draw from these ac-

  cusations all the conclusions they would if the accusations were

  intuitively believed, for instance, because they were based on

  perception. Beliefs in witchcraft remain reflective, not fully in-

  tegrated with the rest of cognition. When witches are executed,

  the accusations of witchcraft aren’t the only, or even arguably

  the main, driver, playing more of a post hoc justificatory role.

  Instead, the usual self- interested motives rear their ugly heads.

  190 ch ap t er 12

  For example, in Tanzania, witch killings increase in times of

  drought or flooding, and they mostly target el derly women per-

  ceived as a weight on the family.36

  How to Be a Credible Sycophant

  Confessions, even the most extraordinary ones, are convincing

  because they are self- incriminating. In a more roundabout man-

  ner, the intrinsic believability of self- incriminating statements

  also explains why people profess the silliest opinions, from

  lavishing absurd praises on Kim Jong-il to claiming (nowadays)

  that the earth is flat.

  It has been told of Kim Jong-il, father of current North Ko-

  rean leader Kim Jong-un, that he could already walk and talk

  when he was a tiny babe of six months.37 At university, he wrote

  more than a thousand books and articles. His perfect memory

  allows him to remember “all the exploits performed by the fa-

  mous men of all ages and countries, all the po liti cal events, big

  and small, and the significant creations of humankind and their

  detailed figures, [as well as] the names, ages, and birthdays of all

  the people he has met.” He understands all complex topics “bet-

  ter than the experts.”38 Kim Jong-il can also teleport, control the

  weather, and set worldwide fashion trends.39

  In terms of overinflated compliments, Kim Jong-il is hardly

  unique. According to the most inventive toadies of their respec-

  tive countries, Hafiz al- Assad (Bashar’s father) was Syria’s “pre-

  mier pharmacist”; Nicolae Ceauşescu was the Giant of the

  Carpathians, the Source of Our Light, the Celestial Body; Mao

  could easily beat swimming world rec ords; Saddam Hussein was

  the new Nebuchadnezzar.40

>   Could people really have been brainwashed into believing

  such nonsense? Obviously not. Even in North Korea, “few people

  w i t c he s ’ c o nf e s si o ns 191

  have been convinced by this propaganda because since Kim

  [Jong-il] came to power, economic conditions have gone from

  bad to worse.”41 The Romanians who had been heaping praises

  on Ceauşescu were all too eager to lynch the Source of Their

  Light™ when the opportunity arose. Libya’s citizens might have

  plastered Gaddafi’s face on their walls, their halls, their stalls, they

  still hunted him like a wild animal when his regime crumbled.

  Flattery toward these Dear Leaders was not “a way of expressing

  deeply held emotions,” but “a code to be mastered” if one wanted

  to survive in ruthless regimes.42

  Leaders don’t incentivize such flattery because they expect

  people to believe the lavish praises. Indeed, the leaders don’t be-

  lieve the praise themselves: as Mao advised Ho Chi Minh, “The

  more they praise you, the less you can trust them.”43 There are,

  however, some exceptions, cases in which shows of support and

  hyperbolic flattery can be reliable signals of commitment: when

  they are so over the top that they help the speaker burn their

  bridges with other groups, thereby credibly signaling their alle-

  giance to the remaining group.

  Burning Bridges

  Joining a group, which could be anything from an amateur soc-

  cer team to a clique at work, brings benefits: being supported and

  protected by other members, performing activities that wouldn’t

  be pos si ble on your own. These benefits come with a cost: a

  member must do their bit to support the other members and

  contribute to joint activities. A member of a soccer team is ex-

  pected to show up to training sessions, give their best during

  matches, and so forth.44

  Because being part of a good group has many advantages, its

  members have to exert caution toward new potential recruits, to

  192 ch ap t er 12

  make sure the recruits are wil ing to pay the costs and not sim-

  ply ready to reap the benefits.45 The soccer team doesn’t want

  people who are only interested in playing the odd match when

  they feel like it.

  When someone wants to join a group, it can be difficult to

  honestly signal their wil ingness to pay the costs associated with

  membership. They can say, “I’ll be a good team player!,” but that’s

 

‹ Prev