• Fact Sheets
• Endorsements and Resolutions
• Model Legislation and Guidelines
• State Legislation
• State Laws
• Case Law, Briefs, and Motions
• Reports, Surveys and Polling
• Law Review and Journal Articles
• Police Department Procedures for Recording Interrogations
• Media Coverage
• False Confessions
• Links

Fact Sheets

NACDL: Videotaped Interrogations Has Broad Support (2005) Quotes from law enforcement, judges, the media, and academics supporting videotaping interrogations. Center for Policy Alternatives: Policy Brief (2005) This policy brief is featured in CPA’s publication, Restoring the Promise of America: 2005 Progressive Agenda for the States. List of jurisdictions that require the electronic recording of interrogations through legislation or court action. January 12, 2010.

Endorsements and Resolutions

American Bar Association: Resolution Endorsing Videotaping Interrogations (Feb. 9, 2004) Accompanying Report American Council of Chief Defenders: Resolution Supporting Videotaping Interrogations (Dec. 4, 2004) National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers: Resolution Endorsing Videotaping Interrogations (May 4, 2002) National District Attorneys Association: Policy on Electronic Recording of Statements (Oct. 23, 2004) Sangamon County, IL State Attorney Letter Praising a Video-Recording System (Feb. 1, 2007)

Model Legislation and Guidelines

NACDL’s State Legislative Network: Model Statute on Mandatory Electronic Recording of Custodial Interrogations (2004) Our State Legislative Network members collaborated to develop this model statute. Thomas P. Sullivan: Model Bill for Electronic Recording of Custodial Interrogations (2005) This model legislation is included as the appendix to Sullivan’s article, “Electronic Recording of Custodial Interrogations: Everybody Wins,” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, vol. 95 no. 3 (2005). Center for Policy Alternatives: Policy Brief and Model Legislation (2005) This model legislation is featured in CPA’s publication, Restoring the Promise of America: 2005 Progressive Agenda for the States. *Maryland Office of the Public Defender: Recommendations and Conclusions of the Videotaping Interrogations Workgroup (Nov. 2004) The Maryland Office of the Public Defender examined the issue of videotaping interrogations. These are their findings and recommendations on what should be included in recording legislation. Members Only. American Law Institute: Model Code of Pre-Arraignment Procedure, Sec. 130.4, relating to recordings of custodial interrogations (May 20, 1975) This ALI model code – adopted in 1975 – requires a sound recording of custodial interrogations. The reporters’ commentary is included as well to show the reasoning behind this proposed requirement.

State Legislation

Our state legislation page has links to recent bills that have been introduced and, in some cases passed, on electronic recording of interrogations from numerous states.

State Laws

DC: Electronic Recording Procedures Act of 2004 (Act 15-751) IL: Recorded Statements Act (Public Act 93-206; HB 223) Requires electronic recording of custodial interrogations of homicide suspects within two years of enactment. IL: Capital Punishment Reform (Public Act 93-605; SB 472) Section 5 of this law creates a “custodial interview pilot program.” IL: Amendment to Require Recorded Interrogations in DUI-Related Deaths (Public Act 94-117; SB 72) Provides that the provisions requiring the videotaping of custodial interrogations in homicide cases also applies to cases involving driving under the influence of alcohol or other drugs that resulted in death. ME: An Act To Require the Videotaping of Police Interrogations (Ch. 677; LD 891) MD: An Act Concerning Criminal Procedure - Custodial Interogation - Recordation (Chapter 360, HB 6) NE: An Act relating to criminal procedure; to require electronic recording of custodial interrogations as prescribed; to define terms; to require jury instructions for failure to comply; to provide exceptions; and to address inaudible portions of recordings. (LB 179) NC: An Act to provide that a custodial Interrogation in a homicide case must be electronically recorded in its entirety (Session Law 2007-434; HB 1626) NM: An Act Relating to Law Enforcement; Requiring Electronic Recording of Custodial Interrogations; Establishing Procedures for Electronic Recording (HB 382) TX: Article 38.22 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure WI: AB 648 (2005); A comprehensive criminal justice reform law to reduce wrongful convictions. Among other provisions, the law requires juvenile custodial interrogations to be electronically recorded, and makes it the "policy of the state" for law enforcement to record custodial interrogations of adults in felony cases.

Case Law, Briefs and Motions

AK: Stephan v. State, 711 P.2d 1156 (Alaska 1985) The Alaska Supreme Court held that an unexcused failure to record custodial interrogations violated the suspect’s right to due process under the state constitution. During a custodial interview, you must record the entire conversation. The criteria are: (1) in custody; and (2) at a place of detention. A place of detention could be a police vehicle, corrections facility or police station. IA: State v. Hajtic, No. 03-1481 (Dec. 1, 2006) The Supreme Court of Iowa upheld the conviction of Hajtic, in part because a videotape of the Miranda proceedings and the interrogation were available. The court encouraged the videotaping of custodial interrogations and shortly after the decision the Attorney's General office informed all county attorneys that the decision should be read as essentially mandating the practice. MA: Commonwealth v. DiGiambattista, 813 N.E.2d 516 (Mass. 2004) The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts held that when an interrogation is not at least audiotaped, a jury instruction may be requested “advising that the State’s highest court has expressed a preference that such interrogations be recorded whenever practicable,” that the jury “should weigh evidence of the defendant’s alleged statement with great caution and care,” and that the “absence of a recording permits (but does not compel) them to conclude that the Commonwealth has failed to prove voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt.” MN: State v. Scales, 518 N.W. 2d 587 (Minn. 1994) The Minnesota Supreme Court held that custodial interrogations must be recorded “to ensure the fair and equitable presentation of evidence at trial.” NH: State v. Barnett, 789 A.2d 629, 632-633 (N.H. 2002) The Supreme Court of New Hampshire held that if a recorded final statement is offered into evidence, the recording is admissable only if the entire post-Miranda interrogation is recorded. NJ: NJ SupCt Administrative Determination re Report of the Special Committee on the Recordation of Custodial Interrogations (Oct. 14, 2005) Includes the Supreme Court of New Jersey's comments on the Report of the Special Committee on the Recordation of Custodial Interrogations, the text of the court rule requiring recordings of custodial interrogations, "Rule 3:17: Electronic Recordation," and the model jury charge that is to be given to defendants in cases where the police "inexcusably failed to electronically record statement." NJ: State v. Cook, 847 A.2d 530 (N.J. 2004) The New Jersey Supreme Court established an advisory committee “to study and make recommendations on use of electronic recordation of custodial interrogations” as a result of this case. WI: State v. Jerrell, case no. 2002AP3423 (July 7, 2005) This 2005 Wisconsin Supreme Court decision requires “all custodial interrogations of juveniles in future cases be electronically recorded where feasible, and without exception when questioning occurs at a place of detention.”

Reports, Surveys, and Polling

CA: California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice Tentative Recommendations Re: False Confessions (May 2006) The California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice recently held hearings on recording interrogations to prevent false confessions. The Commission's "Tentative Recommendations" includes a proposed bill for the California legislature to pass. CT: Commission on the Death Penalty Report (Jan. 2003) This report examines the imposition of the death penalty in Connecticut and recommends that custodial interrogations of murder suspects be electronically recorded (see p. 61). DC: Public Defender Service Poll of Eligible Jurors on Evidence in Criminal Cases (Dec. 2003) This poll of 1000 eligible jurors in the District of Columbia includes questions about the persuasiveness and reliability of videotaped confessions. IL: Report of the Governor’s Commission on Capital Punishment (April 2002) This report examines the imposition of the death penalty in Illinois. Recommendation 4 of the report calls for videotaping the full interrogation of suspects in homicide cases. NJ: Report of the Supreme Court Special Committee on Recordation of Custodial Interrogations (April 15, 2005) In trying to determine if interrogation recording procedures should be required in New Jersey, the state Supreme Court established a committee to “study and make recommendations on the use of electronic recordation of custodial interrogations.” This excellent report reviews the status of interrogation recording law and practices around the country and recommends that the state Supreme Court should “encourage the electronic recordation of custodial interrogations. US: Police Experiences with Recording Custodial Interrogations, Thomas P. Sullivan, Center on Wrongful Convictions (Summer 2004) Based on discussions with 238 law enforcement agencies in 38 states, this report documents the hundreds of police departments that are voluntarily recording custodial interrogations – and liking the results. US: International Association of Chiefs of Police Survey on the Use of CCTV/Video Cameras in Law Enforcement (March 2001) This survey of over 200 U.S. law enforcement agencies examines the use of closed-circuit television and video cameras by the police, including in interrogation rooms. VT: Report of the Eyewitness Identification and Custodial Interrogation Study Committee (December 14, 2007) In 2007, the Vermont State Legislature created the Eyewitness Identification and Custodial Interrogations Study Committee as part of a major crime bill. The committee's charge, extensive list of reviewed materials, and recommended procedures for both the recording of custodial interrogations and eywitness identification (photo and live line-ups) are included in the report. WI: Wisconsin Attorney General's Recommendations for Electronic Recording of Custodial Interviewing (Dec. 2005) In 2005, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that juvenile interrogations must be recorded and the legislature passed legislation making it a statewide policy to record interrogations of adults in felony cases. In December, the state Attorney General issued statewide recommendations for recording custodial interrogations.