Section One: False ConfessionsIntroductionThe criminal justice system identifies a false confession as a written or oral statement in which an individual falsely admits to being guilty of a crime. In recent years, several cases have been reported in which an innocent person falsely confessed to a crime (Frumkin and Lamendola, 2009). The consequences of these false confessions often result in the conviction of innocent people for crimes they did not commit (Schell, 2011). The case to be explored in this article is the wrongful conviction of George Allen Jr., which will be discussed later. False confessions may be encouraged by coercion, mental disorder, or incompetence of the accused. Although false confessions may seem extraordinary and improbable, they occur regularly in case law (Kassin, Appleby, & Perillo, 2010). Types of False Confessions To date, there are five different types of false confessions. These include voluntary false confessions, false confessions consistent with duress, false confessions internalized under duress, reactive and coerced false confessions, and false confessions substituted by duress (Frumkin, 2010). The types of forgeries often overlap; however, they all have unique properties that set them apart from each other. Kassin and Wrightsman describe three of the five types of false confessions. The first is voluntary false confession; these confessions are given without any pressure from the police. An innocent person voluntarily goes to the police to falsely confess to a crime. The individual confesses falsely for one of three reasons: because of their morbid need for notoriety, to protect a friend or relative, or a pathological need to be punished (Kassin & Wrightsman, 1985). .... middle of article ...... techniques that detectives use to obtain confessions (Gudjonsson, 2003). To reduce the number of innocent people incarcerated due to false confessions, interrogation methods must be considered and modified based on how that interrogation technique elicits confessions. New interrogation techniques must show suspects that they do not need to provide false confessions in order to return home (Gudjonsoon, 2003). There are different types of false confessions that need to be considered when modifying interrogation techniques, as they all have their own properties that allow them to differ from each other (Kassin, Appleby & Perillo, 2010). It is clear that false confessions seem unlikely to most people, but society must accept that they occur frequently in jurisprudence and therefore must be taken seriously..