“I Would Never Confess”: The Truth About False Confessions with Robin Dahlberg

Why would an innocent person confess to a crime they didn’t commit?

It’s one of the most misunderstood questions in criminal justice—and the answer reveals important lessons about interrogation techniques, false confessions, wrongful convictions, and the way we search for the truth.

In this episode of Truth Be Told, host Dave Thompson, CFI sits down with attorney, advocate, and photographer Robin Dahlberg, author of Breaking Point, a powerful project that takes readers inside the interrogation experiences of six exonerees who confessed to crimes they did not commit.

Through the stories of Jeffrey Deskovic, Vanessa Gathers, Byron Halsey, Eddie Lowery, Christopher Ochoa, and Raymond Santana of the Exonerated Five, Dave and Robin explore how an investigation can go wrong long before a confession ever occurs—and why understanding the human experience inside the interrogation room matters for investigators, attorneys, and anyone interested in criminal justice reform.

The conversation examines some of the most important questions surrounding modern interview and interrogation practices:

Why do innocent people falsely confess?• How can tunnel vision and confirmation bias influence an investigation?• What happens when investigators become convinced they have the right suspect?• How can maximization, minimization, threats, promises, and false-evidence tactics influence a suspect’s decisions?• Why is recording the entire interview and interrogation so important?• How can investigators obtain reliable information without relying on coercive or guilt-presumptive interrogation techniques?• What role do public defenders, expert witnesses, and unequal resources play in wrongful conviction cases?• And what can today’s investigators learn directly from people who experienced a wrongful interrogation and conviction?

One particularly important theme is perspective. Dahlberg’s Breaking Point uses photography and the words of exonerees to put the audience in the other chair—to understand what an interrogation can feel like to the person being questioned. The goal isn’t to vilify investigators. It’s to recognize that investigators, suspects, victims, attorneys, and families are all human—and that reliable investigations require practices designed to protect the integrity of the evidence and the search for truth.

Dave also connects these cases to the evolving science of investigative interviewing and the importance of continually challenging our own methods. Better interviewin