Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s habeas petition challenging her murder conviction on ground that police officials violated her 5th and 14th Amendment rights by using improper coercive tactics to generate damaging statements during 7-hour video-taped interrogation. Ct. rejected defendant’s claim that interrogation was unduly coercive, where: (1) defendant voluntarily waived her Miranda rights prior to interrogation; (2) officers did not use violence or intimidation during interrogation; (3) officers were generally attentive to defendant’s personal needs during interrogation and offered to take breaks during interrogation; and (4) police officials could properly confront plaintiff about fact that medical evidence did not support her initial claim that baby fell off bed. Also, social worker, who conveyed idea that social services might take defendant’s children away if deceased baby had been injured in defendant’s home, did not convey message that defendant would lose her children if she did not confess to murder of baby.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Criminal Court
Confession