THE GIST OF THE DISCUSSION IS THAT POLICE NEED NOT RESORT TO QUESTIONABLE PRACTICES TO EXTRACT CONFESSIONS FROM SUSPECTS, BECAUSE PEOPLE WHO COMMIT CRIMES AND WANT TO CONFESS TO THEM GENERALLY WILL DO SO, EVEN WHEN AN ATTORNEY ADVISES THEM NOT TO. IT IS ALSO POINTED OUT THAT DEFENDANTS, ESPECIALLY YOUNG AND INEXPERIENCED DEFENDANTS, WHO ARE PROVIDED COMPETENT LEGAL COUNSEL IN THE EARLY STAGES OF THE LEGAL PROCESS USUALLY WILL CONFESS IF THEY ARE GUILTY. THE DISCUSSION CONSISTS LARGELY OF REVIEWS OF CASES IN WHICH THE ADMISSIBILITY OF A CONFESSION AS EVIDENCE OR SOME RELATED QUESTION WAS AN ISSUE. INCLUDED ARE REFERENCES TO DECISIONS BY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT AND BY OTHER APPELLATE COURTS BEARING UPON THE RIGHTS OF ACCUSED PERSONS. PARTICULAR ATTENTION IS DIRECTED TO THE CASE OF BREWER V. WILLIAMS, IN WHICH ILLEGAL QUESTIONING OF A MURDER SUSPECT BY POLICE LED THE SUPREME COURT TO OVERTURN THE CONVICTION IN THE CASE AND RETURN THE MATTER TO COURTS FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. ALSO INCLUDED IS A DETAILED ACCOUNT OF A CASE IN WHICH THE AUTHOR RENDERED A DECISION PERTAINING TO THE EXCLUSION OF CONFESSIONS OBTAINED AFTER ILLEGAL ARRESTS. DETAILED ACCOUNTS ARE ALSO PRESENTED OF CASES IN WHICH THE AUTHOR, ACTING AS DEFENSE COUNSEL, ADVISED CLIENTS TO MAKE VOLUNTARY STATEMENTS REGARDING THE CRIMES WITH WHICH THEY WERE CHARGED. IT IS POINTED OUT THAT THE LAW ON CONFESSIONS AND SELF-INCRIMINATION CHANGES AS NEW SITUATIONS INVOLVING CONTACTS BETWEEN POLICE AND SUSPECTS ARISE. (LKM)