Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Confession of Cold Case Murder Suspect in Question

Neither the suspect's DNA or fingerprints were not found at the crime scene, however, the Fargo, North Dakota man confessed to the strangulation murder of a prostitute in 1993.  The suspect and victim lived in the same trailer park and was the first one to find the victim.  Detectives zoned in on the suspect because his story kept on changing, eventually leading to a confession.  Was the confession coerced?  Tell me your thoughts?
Read the rest of the article here

8 comments:

  1. At first I was going to comment on how some people under duress may fold and confess....and then I saw the perps picture. Yeah, he did it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I believe Burcham is guilty. The police should compare the autopsy and/or time of death, to the time the suspect claims to have left the crime scene. By doing this, investigators can more accurately suggest that Burcham killed the victim before he left the trailer. Even if the confession is suppressed and excluded from trail Burcham will be found guilty, not only because of his guilty face but because it will be very hard for the defense to convince a jury that the victim strangled herself. Jo Sa PSC 201

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Two problems I see in this case, first problem I see in this case was the waving of his "Mirandas" in a not "VIK" (voluntarily, intelligently and knowingly manner) It is very important for a confession in which Mirandas had been waived, that is giving ("VIKLY"). Nelson (the investigator) can lie about whats gonna happen if he confess. Misleading a suspect ,into what's going to happen, in order to obtain a confession after he/she waves mirandas is not illegal. He maybe ugly, that does not make him guilty.
    Second problem I see in this case is the absence of fingerprints and DNA evidence; this whole case is based in this confession. So, this man can be convicted of murder in a possible coerce confession (are you kidding?). Sloppy police work during the investigation of the crime scene, A mentally ill person who strangulated a woman and is careful enough of not leaving prints or DNA behind. Something is wrong with this pic. Either he is a brilliant mastermind (who does not leave evidence in a murder scene) which he is not, by giving the stupid confession or police did not do their work as they were suppose to do it. I will set for the latter. PCS201_PEPE

    ReplyDelete
  6. Now, as what supervisors should do? Well, they should re-train their crime scene investigators. And give more training to their investigator in how to obtain a "closer" confession. They had almost 20 years with the case, come on!!

    ReplyDelete
  7. I believe that this case is now solved and is correct. I don't feel as if the defendant was not coerced into confessing. Most people if they are lying they slip up no matter what. When you lie you always stumble over your own words cause you are always thinking about a cover up for the past cover up you just stated. Eventually, you just loose yourself in the lies and can't remember what you said before ultimately causing you to mess up and have to come clean. This is shown when Burcham states that the female was alive after he left from having sexual intercourse then going back on his word and saying she wasn't.
    As pega states one major thing you need when you are questioning a suspect is for him/her to be voluntarily, intelligently and knowing what is going on. As a supervisor of that department I would set up a training program about interviewing suspects and being able to judge whether or not they are competent to be waiving their miranda rights.

    ReplyDelete