Case rethinking: a protocol for reviewing criminal investigations

References

• ACPO. (2006). Murder investigation manual. Wyboston, Bedfordshire: National Centre for Policing Excellence (Association of Chief Police Officers).
   Google Scholar
• Adcock, J. M., & Stein, S. L. (2013). Cold case models for evaluating unresolved homicides. Investigative Sciences Journal, 5, 19–28.
   Google Scholar
• Ask, K., & Granhag, P. A. (2007). Motivational bias in criminal investigators’ judgments of witness reliability. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 561–591.10.1111/jasp.2007.37.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blair, J. P., & Rossmo, D. K. (2010). Evidence in context: Bayes’ theorem and investigations. Police Quarterly, 13, 123–135.10.1177/1098611110365686
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyd, N., & Rossmo, D. K. (1994, February). David Milgaard, the Supreme Court and Section 690: A wrongful conviction revisited. Canadian Lawyer, pp. 28–29, 32.
   Google Scholar
• Brockner, J. (1992). The escalation of commitment to a failing course of action: Toward theoretical progress. The Academy of Management Review, 17, 39–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman, M. D. (2010). Sunk costs and the commitment to medical treatment. Current Psychology, 29, 121–134.10.1007/s12144-010-9077-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colloff, P. (2012, December). The innocent man, part two. Texas Monthly. Retrieved December 9, 2013, from http://www.texasmonthly.com/story/innocent-man-part-two
   Google Scholar
• Commission of Inquiry Into the Wrongful Conviction of David Milgaard. (2005, March 7). Public documents. Retrieved December 10, 2013, from http://www.justice.gov.sk.ca/milgaard/pubdocs/march7/Nichol%20John/018589.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Cory, P. de C. (2001). The Inquiry Regarding Thomas Sophonow. Winnipeg: Queen’s Printer.
   Google Scholar
• Findley, K. A., & Scott, M. S. (2006). The multiple dimensions of tunnel vision in criminal cases. Wisconsin Law Review, 2, 291–397.
   Google Scholar
• FPT Heads of Prosecutions Committee Working Group. (2004). Report on the prevention of miscarriages of justice. Ottawa: Department of Justice.
   Google Scholar
• Garrett, B. L., & Neufeld, P. J. (2009). Invalid forensic science testimony and wrongful convictions. Virginia Law Review, 95, 1–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gawande, A. (2011). The checklist manifesto: How to get things right. New York, NY: Metropolitan Books.
   Google Scholar
• Gigerenzer, G. (2002). Calculated risks: How to know when numbers deceive you. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Gould, J. B., Carrano, J., Leo, R., & Young, J. (2013). Predicting erroneous convictions: A social science approach to miscarriages of justice. Final report submitted to the US Department of Justice (Document No. 241389). Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Griffith, D., & Tversky, A. (2004). The weighing of evidence and the determinants of confidence. In A. Tversky (Ed.), Preference, belief, and similarity: Selected writings (pp. 275–299). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gross, S. R., O’Brien, B., Hu, C., & Kennedy, E. H. (2014). Rate of false conviction of criminal defendants who are sentenced to death. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 7230–7235.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, C. (1999, December 31). ‘Statistical error’ in child murder trial. Telegraph. Retrieved July 12, 2008, from www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlContent.jhtml?html=/archive/1999/12/31/nsal31.html
   Google Scholar
• Heuer, Jr., R. J. (1999). Psychology of intelligence analysis. Washington, DC: Center for the Study of Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Horwitz, S., & Ruane, M. E. (2003). Sniper: Inside the hunt for the killers who terrorized the nation. New York, NY: Random House.
   Google Scholar
• Huff, C. R., Rattner, A., & Sagarin, E. (1996). Convicted but innocent: Wrongful conviction and public policy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Innocence Project. (2013). The causes of wrongful conviction. Retrieved December 2, 2013, from http://www.innocenceproject.org/understand/
   Google Scholar
• Irvine, B., & Dunningham, C. (1993). Human factors in the quality control of CID investigations. Royal Commission on Criminal Justice Research, Study No. 21. London: HMSO.
   Google Scholar
• Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascoes (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, D., Grieve, J., & Milne, B. (2008a). The case to review murder investigations. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 2, 470–480.10.1093/police/pan053
   Google Scholar
• Jones, D., Grieve, J., & Milne, B. (2008b). Reviewing the reviewers: A tool to aid homicide reviews. The Journal of Homicide and Major Incident Investigation, 4, 59–70.
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58, 697–720.10.1037/0003-066X.58.9.697
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klockars, C. B., & Mastrofski, S. D. (Eds.). (1991). Thinking about police: Contemporary readings (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Koehler, D. J. (1991). Explanation, imagination, and confidence in judgment. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 499–519.10.1037/0033-2909.110.3.499
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin, A. (2011, November 27). The prosecution’s case against DNA. The New York Times Magazine, p. MM44.
   Google Scholar
• Myers, D. (2002). Intuition: Its powers and perils. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2009). Strengthening forensic science in the United States: A path forward. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Brien, B. (2009). Prime suspect: An examination of factors that aggravate and counteract confirmation bias in criminal investigations. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 15, 315–334.10.1037/a0017881
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robertson, B., & Vignaux, G. A. (1995). Interpreting evidence: Evaluating forensic evidence in the courtroom. Chichester: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Roman, J., Walsh, K., Lachman, P., & Yahner, J. (2012). Post-conviction DNA testing and wrongful conviction. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Ross, L., & Anderson, C. A. (1982). Shortcomings in the attribution process: On the origins and maintenance of erroneous social assessments. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 129–152). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511809477
   Google Scholar
• Rossmo, D. K. (2009). Criminal investigative failures. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Simon, H. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review, 63, 129–138.10.1037/h0042769
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snook, S. A. (2000). Friendly fire: The accidental shootdown of U.S. Black Hawks over Northern Iraq. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Staw, B. M. (1981). The escalation of commitment to a course of action. Academy of Management Review, 6, 577–587.
   Google Scholar
• Stelfox, P., & Pease, K. (2005). Cognition and detection: Reluctant bedfellows? In M. J. Smith & N. Tilley (Eds.), Crime science: New approaches to preventing and detecting crime (pp. 191–207). Cullompton: Willan.
   Google Scholar
• Stubbins, D., & Stubbins, N. (2009). On the horns of a narrative: Judgment, heuristics, and biases in criminal investigation. In D. K. Rossmo (Ed.), Criminal investigative failures (pp. 99–140). Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Taroni, F., Aitken, C., Garbolino, P., & Biedermann, A. (2006). Bayesian networks and probabilistic inference in forensic science. Chichester: Wiley.10.1002/0470091754
   Google Scholar
• Willmer, M. A. P. (1970). Crime and information theory. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, M. (2013). Homicide detectives’ intuition. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 10, 182–199.10.1002/jip.v10.2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar