criminal psychology-第31部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！


ertion；　and　leads　to　considerable　incorrectness。　A　confession　is　only　established　in　truth　when　it　is　construed　psychologically；　when　the　whole　inner　life　of　the　confessor　and　his　external　conditions　are　brought　into　relation　with　it；　and　the　remaining　motives　established　as　at　least　possible。　And　this　must　be　done　to　avoid　the　reproach　of　having　condemned　some　confessor　without　evidence；　for　a　confession　having　no　motive　may　be　untrue；　and　therefore　not　evidential。

（b）　_Partial　confessions_　are　difficult；　not　only　because　they　make　it　harder　to　prove　the　evidence　for　what　is　not　confessed；　but　also　because　what　is　confessed　appears　doubtful　in　the　light　of　what　is　not。　Even　in　the　simplest　cases　where　the　reason　for　confession　and　silence　seems　to　be　clear；　mistakes　are　possible。　If；　for　example；　a　thief　confesses　to　having　stolen　only　what　has　been　found　in　his　possession　but　denies　the　rest；　it　is　fairly　probable　that　he　hopes　some　gain　from　the　evidence　in　which　there　appears　to　be　no　proof　　of　his　having　stolen　what　has　not　been　found　upon　him。　But　though　this　is　generally　the　case；　it　might　occur　that　the　thief　wants　to　assume　the　guilt　of　another　person；　and　hence　naturally　can　confess　only　to　what　he　is　accused　of；　inasmuch　as　he　either　has　insufficient　or　no　evidence　whatever　of　his　guilt　for　the　rest　of　the　crime。

Another　fairly　clear　reason　for　partial　confession；　is　shown　in　the　confession　to　a　certain　degree　of　malicious　intent；　as　the　denial　of　the　intent　to　kill。　If　this　is　made　by　a　person　who　may　be　supposed　to　know　the　legal　situation；　either　because　of　earlier　experience　or　for　other　reasons；　there　is　sufficient　justification　for　doubting　the　honesty　of　his　confession。　Most　of　such　cases　belong　to　the　numerous　class　in　which　the　defendant　confesses　to　a　series　of　facts　or　a　number　of　things；　and　denies　a　few　of　them　without　any　apparent　reason；　he　may　confess　to　a　dozen　objects　used　in　an　assault　and　simply　refuse　to　discuss　two　probably　quite　insignificant　ones。　If　such　a　case　comes　up　for　judgment　to　the　full　bench；　half　the　judges　say　that　since　he　has　stolen　twelve　he　must　have　taken　the　other　two；　and　the　other　half　say　that　since　he　has　confessed　to　twelve　he　would　have　confessed　to　the　other　two　if　he　had　taken　them。　Generally　speaking；　both　sides　are　right；　one　inference　is　as　justified　as　the　other。　As　a　rule；　such　cases　do　not　repay　a　great　deal　of　troublesome　examination；　inasmuch　as　the　question　of　A's　having　stolen　twelve　or　fourteen　objects　can　little　affect　either　his　guilt　or　his　sentence。　But　it　is　to　be　remembered　that　it　is　never　indifferent　whether　a　man　pleads　guilty　or　not　guilty；　and　later　on；　especially　in　another　case；　it　may　be　quite　the　reverse　of　indifferent　whether　a　man　is　condemned　because　of　a　matter　indifferent　to…day。　Suppose　that　the　denied　theft　was　of　a　worthless　but　characteristic　thing；　e。　g。　an　old　prayer…book。　If　now　the　thief　is　again　suspected　of　a　robbery　which　he　denies　and　the　theft　is　again　that　of　an　old　prayerbook；　then　it　is　not　indifferent　as　a　matter　of　proof　whether　the　man　was　condemned　for　stealing　a　prayer…book　or　not。　If　he　was　so　condemned；　there　will　already　be　remarks　about；　‘‘a　certain　passion　for　old　prayer…books；''　and　the　man　will　be　suspected　of　the　second　theft。

In　regard　to　the　possession　of　stolen　goods；　such　a　sentence　may　have　similar　significance。　I　recall　a　case　in　which　several　people　were　sentenced　for　the　theft　of　a　so…called　fokos　（a　Hungarian　cane　with　a　head　like　an　ax）。　Later　a　fokos　was　used　in　murder　in　the　same　region　and　the　first　suspicion　of　the　crime　was　attached　to　the　thief；　who　might；　because　of　his　early　crime；　have　been　in　possession　　of　a　fokos。　Now　suppose　that　the　man　had　confessed　to　theft　of　everything　but　the　fokos；　and　that　he　had　been　condemned　on　the　basis　of　the　confession；　the　fact　would　be　of　far…reaching　significance　in　the　present　case。　Of　course　it　is　not　intended　that　the　old　case　is　to　be　tried　again　before　the　new。　That　would　be　a　difficult　job　after　the　lapse　of　some　time；　and　in　addition；　would　be　of　little　use；　for　everybody　recalls　the　old　judgment　anyway　and　supposes　that　the　circumstances　must　have　been　such　as　to　show　the　man　guilty。　If　a　man　is　once　sentenced　for　something　he　has　not　confessed　to；　the　stigma　remains　no　matter　how　the　facts　may　be　against　it。

Experience　has　shown　that　the　victims　of　theft　count　everything　stolen　that　they　do　not　discover　at　the　first　glance。　And　it　might　have　been　lost　long　before　the　theft；　or　have　been　stolen　at　an　earlier　or　a　later　time。　For　this　reason　it　often　happens　that　servants；　and　even　the　children　of　the　house　or　other　frequenters；　take　the　robbery　as　an　opportunity　for　explaining　the　disappearance　of　things　they　are　responsible　for　or　steal　afresh　and　blame　it　upon　‘‘the　thief。''　The　quantity　stolen　is　generally　exaggerated；　moreover；　in　order　to　excite　universal　sympathy　and　perhaps　to　invoke　help。　In　general；　we　must　hold　that　there　is　no　psychological　reason　that　a　confessor　should　deny　anything　the　confession　of　which　can　bring　him　no　additional　harm。　The　last　point　must　be　carefully　treated；　for　it　requires　taking　the　attitude　of　the　accused　and　not　of　the　examiner。　It　is　the　former's　information　and　view…point　that　must　be　studied；　and　it　often　contains　the　most　perverted　view…points；　e。　g。；　one　man　denies　out　of　mere　obstinacy　because　he　believes　that　his　guilt　is　increased　by　this　or　that　fact。　The　proposition：　who　has　stolen　one　thing；　has　also　stolen　the　rest；　has　slight　justification。

（c）　If　a　denying　fellow…criminal　is　accused　by　a　confession；　the　interpretation　of　the　latter　becomes　difficult。　First　of　all；　the　pure　kernel　of　the　confession　must　be　brought　to　light；　and　everything　set　aside　that　might　serve　to　free　the　confessor　and　involve　the　other　in　guilt。　This　portion　of　the　work　is　comparatively　the　easiest；　inasmuch　as　it　depends　upon　the　circumstances　of　the　crime。　It　is　more　difficult　to　determine　what　degree　of　crime　the　confessor　attached　to　himself　by　accusing　also　the　other　man；　because　clearness　can　be　reached　in　such　a　case　only　by　working　out　the　situation　from　beginning　to　end　in　two　directions；　first；　by　studying　it　without　reference　to　the　fellow…criminal；　second；　with　such　reference。　The　complete　elimination　of　the　additional　circumstance　is　exceedingly　troublesome　because　it　requires　the　complete　control　of　the　material　　and　because　it　is　always　psychologically　difficult　so　to　exclude　an　event　already　known　in　its　development　and　inference　as　to　be　able　to　formulate　a　theory　quite　without　reference　to　it。

If　this　is　really　accomplished　and　some　positive　fact　is　established　in　the　self…accusation；　the　question　becomes　one　of　finding　the　value　seen　by　the　confessor　in　blaming　himself　together　with　his　fellow。　Revenge；　hatred；　jealousy；　envy；　anger；　suspicion；　and　other　passions　will　be　the　forces　in　which　this　value　will　be　found。　One　man　brings　his　ancient　comrade　into　jeopardy　in　revenge　for　the　latter's　injustice　in　the　division　of　the　booty；　or　in　deliberate　anger　at　the　commission　of　some　dangerous　stupidity　in　a　burglary。　Again；　it　often　happens　that　he　or　she；　through　jealousy；　accuses　her　or　him　in　order　that　the　other　may　be　also　imprisoned；　and　so　not　become　disloyal。　Business　jealousy；　again；　is　as　influential　as　the　attempt　to　prevent　another　from　disposing　of　some　hidden　booty；　or　from　carrying　out　by　himself　some　robbery　planned　in　partnership。　These　motives　are　not　always　easy　to　discover　but　are　conceivable。　There　are　also　cases；　not　at　all　rare；　in　which　the　ordinary　man　is　fully　lacking　in　comprehension　of　‘‘the　substitute　value；''　which　makes　him　confess　the　complicity　of　his　fellow。　I　am　going　to　offer　just　one　example；　and　inasmuch　as　the　persons　concerned　are　long　since　dead；　will；　by　way　of　exception；　mention　their　names　and　the　improbability　of　their　stories。　In　1879　an　old　man；　Blasius　Kern；　was　found　one　morning　completely　snowed　over　and　with　a　serious　wound　in　the　head。　There　was　no　possible　suspicion　of　robbery　as　motive　of　the　murder；　inasmuch　as　the　man　was　on　his　way　home　drunk；　as　usual；　and　it　was　supposed　that　he　had　fallen　down　and　had　smashed　his　skull。　In　1881　a　young　fellow；　Peter　Seyfried；　came　to　court　and　announced　that　he　had　been　hired　by　Blasius　Kern's　daughter；　Julia　Hauck；　and　her　husband　August　Hauck；　to　kill　the　old　fellow；　who　had　become　unendurable　through　his　love　of　drink　and　his　endless　quarrelsomeness；　and　accordingly　he　had　done　the　deed。　He　had　been　promised　an　old　pair　of　trousers　and　three　gulden；　but　they　had　given　him　the　trousers；　not　the　money；　and　as　all　his　attempts　to　collect　payment　had　failed　he　divulged　the　secret　of　the　Hauck　people。　When　I　asked　him　if　he　were　unaware　that　he　himself　was　subject　to　the　law　he　said；　‘‘I　don't　care；　the　others　at　least　will　also　be　punished；why　haven't　they　kept　their　word。''　And　this　lad　was　very　stupid　and　microcephalic；　but　according　to　medico…　legal　opinion；　capable　of　distinguishing　between　right　and　wrong。　His　statements　proved　themselves　true　to　the　very　last　point。　

So　significantly　weak　as　this　in　fundamental　reliability；　very　few　confessions　will　appear　to　be；　but　the　reasons　for　confessions；　difficult　both　to　find　and　to　judge；　are　many　indeed。　The　only　way　to　attain　certainty　is　through　complete　and　thorough…going　knowledge　of　all　the　external　conditions；　but　primarily　through　sound　psychological　insight　into　the　nature　of　both　the　confessor　and　those　he　accuses。　Evidently　the　first　is　by　far　the　more　important：　what　he　is　beneath　the　surface；　his　capacities；　passions；　intentions；　and　purposes；　must　all　be　settled　if　any　decision　is　to　be　arrived　at　as　to　the　advantage　accruing　to　a　man　by　the　accusation　of　others。　For　example；　the　passionate　character　of　some　persons　may　indicate　beyond　a　doubt　that　they　might　find　pleasure　in　suffering　provided　they　could　cause　suffering　to　others　at　that　price。　Passion　is　almost　always　what　impels　men；　and　what　passion　in　particular　lies　behind　a　confession　will　be　revealed　partly　by　the　crime；　partly　by　the　relation　of　the　criminals　one　to　the　other；　partly　by　the　personality　of　the　new　victim。　If　this　passion　was　strong　enough　to　de