The book first examines how the American legal system has, over the last half-century, developed its concept of the proper way to treat confessions. Much of this discussion focuses on the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Arizona v. Fulminante (1991), in which the Court apparently departed from precedent in holding that erroneously admitted confessions are subject to the so-called harmless error rule; i.e., if there is other evidence sufficient to convict the defendant without a confession and if an inadmissible confession is admitted into evidence, no harm has resulted from its inclusion. The authors then examine psychological perspectives on why people confess and how other people, especially jurors, react to confessions. The analysis of the causes of confessions examines the interrogation procedures used by police, followed by the authors' assessment of the process for determining whether or not a confession should be admitted as evidence in a trial. 175 references