Blind Injustice: A Former Prosecutor Exposes the Psychology and Politics of Wrongful Convictions

by Mark Godsey

Awarded Digital Book World’s Best Book Published by a University Press  In this unprecedented view from the trenches, prosecutor turned champion for the innocent Mark Godsey takes us inside the frailties of the human mind as they unfold in real-world wrongful convictions. Drawing upon stories from his own career, Godsey shares how innate psychological flaws in judges, police, lawyers, and juries coupled with a “tough on crime” environment can cause investigations to go awry, leading to the convictions of innocent people. In Blind Injustice, Godsey explores distinct psychological human weaknesses inherent in the criminal justice system—confirmation bias, memory malleability, cognitive dissonance, bureaucratic denial, dehumanization, and others—and illustrates each with stories from his time as a hard-nosed prosecutor and then as an attorney for the Ohio Innocence Project.  He also lays bare the criminal justice system’s internal political pressures. How does the fact that judges, sheriffs, and prosecutors are elected officials influence how they view cases? How can defense attorneys support clients when many are overworked and underpaid? And how do juries overcome bias leading them to believe that police and expert witnesses know more than they do about what evidence means?  This book sheds a harsh light on the unintentional yet routine injustices committed by those charged with upholding justice. Yet in the end, Godsey recommends structural, procedural, and attitudinal changes aimed at restoring justice to the criminal justice system.

Genres: Nonfiction, True Crime, Law, Crime, Social Justice, Audiobook, Social Issues

265 pages, Kindle Edition

First published October 10, 2017

Reviews

[Janet Uhlar · Rating 5 out of 5]

Having witnessed judicial corruption first-hand as a juror in the trial of Irish mob boss Whitey Bulger, I was compelled to write my own book about the trial and what I discovered after (The Truth Be Damned, 2018)
Since the publication of The Truth Be Damned, I have received many letters from inmates in state and federal prisons, thanking me for speaking out about judicial corruption.
One prisoner recommended former District Attorney Mark Godsey's book, Blind Injustice.
This book is a must read for any citizen concerned about reform of the judicial and prison system!
This book is a must read for any citizen who believes that our Constitutional rights are in danger!
Thank you, Mark Godsey!

[Kate Fitzgerald · Rating 5 out of 5]

An Innocence Project lawyer who previously worked as a prosecutor reviews the many unethical practices that lead to wrongful convictions. This is a very interesting, quick read (224 pages). He discusses the psychology behind false confessions and incorrect eyewitness testimony; the lack of science behind most forensic techniques; the general misconceptions about memory and how it works; and the standard practice of court-appointed attorneys not investigating leads that could help their clients' cases. He shares real examples: people who were wrongly convicted, the often ridiculously thin evidence that convicted them, and the typical reactions of prosecutors, even after DNA has proved innocence.

Some of the issues he brought up I was well aware of, and some were pretty surprising, but I think there are many Americans who would be shocked by most if not all of his findings. And, because he's a former prosecutor who has experience on both sides (and he calls out his own bad behavior), I think this would be credible to someone who would otherwise be skeptical. He also offers a lot of suggestions as to how we could reform the system, some of which are already being used in other countries or specific states.

[Anna · Rating 5 out of 5]

As someone who is very into true crime, this is one thing that a lot of us do not realize as we watch shows such as Forensic Files. Many times, when we see the sensationalized cases on our podcasts, we forget that the bite mark "evidence" does not hold up to scrutiny by the scientific process.

This book does a wonderful job of pulling us to the other side of the fence. It boldly exposes behind the scenes secrets that many of us not in law professions do not realize take place. From downright conspiracies against defendants to simple human nature, this book really delves into why people are convicted of crimes they never committed. Crimes they may not even have been in the state for when they were committed. It is difficult to picture why an innocent, or at least not guilty, person must be scrutinized by trial. However, this shows how bad police work and political system works against the innocent and for resolution to cases.

I would recommend this to anyone interested in law, especially if they are used to seeing things from a prosecutor's angle. Just be prepared to be disappointed, frustrated, and even angry.

[Rachael · Rating 5 out of 5]

Blind Injustice: A Former Prosecutor Exposes the Psychology and Politics of Wrongful Convictions by Mark Godsey

Mark Godsey's Blind Injustice is a compelling exploration of the dark underbelly of the criminal justice system, where the innocent can be ensnared in a web of psychological biases and systemic failures. As a former prosecutor who has transitioned into a passionate advocate for the wrongfully convicted, Godsey provides a unique insider perspective that is both enlightening and deeply troubling.

In this eye-opening work, Godsey draws from his experiences within the legal system to illustrate how psychological flaws—such as confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance—can distort the pursuit of justice. He highlights the often-overlooked factors that lead to wrongful convictions, including the inadequacies of court-appointed attorneys and the overwhelming pressures faced by those in power. The book masterfully weaves together personal anecdotes and broader systemic critiques, making it a thought-provoking read for anyone interested in the intricacies of justice.

At just 224 pages, Blind Injustice is a quick yet impactful read. Godsey deftly discusses the psychology behind false confessions and faulty eyewitness testimonies, dismantling the myths that often accompany sensationalized true crime narratives. As a teacher with a background in memory and learning, I found myself resonating with the neuroscience and psychological theories presented. Godsey's exploration of memory fallibility serves as a powerful reminder that our perceptions can be dangerously misleading.

What sets this book apart is its ability to humanize those wrongfully convicted. Through poignant case studies and gripping legal anecdotes, Godsey sheds light on the profound personal consequences of these miscarriages of justice. His narrative challenges readers to recognize the psychological factors that contribute to wrongful convictions and emphasizes the urgent need for systemic reform.

Blind Injustice is not just a book about the failures of the criminal justice system; it is a clarion call for change. Godsey's candid reflections on his own shortcomings add credibility and depth, making this work an essential read for skeptics and advocates alike. If we are to safeguard against the persistent threat of wrongful convictions, we must first confront the uncomfortable truths illuminated by Godsey. As he aptly questions, "Who among us is safe?"

In summary, Blind Injustice is a powerful, insightful examination of a flawed system, and it leaves an indelible mark on its readers. Highly recommended for anyone seeking to understand the complexities of justice and the lives forever altered by its failures.

[Dominic Strevett · Rating 2 out of 5]

Sloppy, bloated, and the language the author uses to present his ideas feels manipulative and ruins his credibility. He loosely applies psychological concepts to the court of law, and at some points, it feels like forcing square pegs in round holes. Each chapter is twice the size it needs to be, and he packs it with examples in case the reader is too stupid to get it the first five times. As for the manipulation, let us look at one example, but to be sure, there are countless others of equally:

"The prosecutors pushed back (…) They suggested—hold on to your hat here—that perhaps a male juror during Elkins’s original trial had opened up the evidence bags when no one was looking (…) To counter this inconvenient fact, the prosecutors threw out other bizarre arguments (…) Wow!"

This style of writing, telling the audience how they should feel instead of letting them decide that for themselves, is manipulative and shows an insecurity to let them facts speak for themselves. This book gets two stars, because some of the information is genuinely helpful, but the author is so insufferable that I refuse to give it any more than that. I’ll close this review off with another excerpt that displays the obnoxious nature of this book and its author:

“I can’t count the number of times I have answered a call from a mother or wife who wants to tell me about her son’s or husband’s wrongful conviction, and the first thing she wants to tell me is how unfair the trial was, and how overzealous the prosecutors acted, and how she never thought a witch hunt like that could happen in America. She invariably tells me stories with great passion, as if she thinks I’m hearing something new and her stories will be a great revelation to me. I say, “Yeah, you were in the fog like everyone else—oblivious. Welcome to my world. Now you know how our system really works, unfortunately. Sorry you have to be one of the enlightened ones.”

[Jennifer Bullington · Rating 5 out of 5]

A shocking eye opener about the many errors in cases of wrongful convictions. The author is a former prosecutor who has the unique perspective of having his own eyes opened to these failed systems and injustices. The biases in judges, police, lawyers, and juries contribute to many of these huge errors. Even when confronted with the errors, many aren’t willing to back down from prosecuting an innocent person or even revisiting a wrong conviction. He cites real cases in his work with the Ohio Innocence Project. Our system absolutely resists admitting mistakes, even when evidence points to innocence leading to sad and maddening stories of innocent people locked away for too many years.

Things really need to change in order to make our system better and unfortunately it seems very slow to change. This book should be a required read for all prosecutors, judges and police! This book makes me so proud of my daughter moving over to the public defender side and the work she will do to represent people well!

[Brett Milam · Rating 5 out of 5]

As one of the millions of people who binged Netflix’s 2015 docu-series, Making a Murderer, but who came into it already primed to rage due to my ideological leanings, “Balkoanization,” (reading Radley Balko in The Washington Post) and skepticism of police greatly enhanced by Ferguson the year prior and other incidents, I’m one of the “choir” Mark Godsey is speaking to in his 2017 book, Blind Injustice: A Former Prosecutor Exposes the Psychology and Politics of Wrongful Convictions. I mention Making a Murder in that litany because Godsey references the docu-series quite a bit to highlight some of those psychological issues at work, and because he recommends pairing his book with the docu-series if you’re creating a curriculum about wrongful convictions (what a great class that would be!). Even though I’m one of the choir — that is, for the most part a.) I am aware of everything mentioned in this book, even if I’m not always aware of their precise technical terms, including the psychological issues; and b.) I am someone who believes strongly in what the Innocence Project and its state affiliates do, that the death penalty is unjust and immoral (among other issues), and that myriad problems plague the criminal justice system demanding widespread reform; aka I’m one of the flock when it comes to the “innocence movement,” as Godsey calls it — Godsey’s book is still worth reading for a comprehensive and organized examination of the flaws pervasive in the system, why reform has been like “battling a glacier” (one of the images a student of his evoked), and importantly, from the outset, Godsey states that his book isn’t a doom book; he offers solutions that have already been implemented in some states, could continue to be implemented in still more, and other solutions worth considering and adopting. In addition to that, Godsey’s perspective, as indicated by the subtitle, is genuinely compelling: He’s living proof that someone clouded by the very forces he’s elucidating, can come through to the other side, and start making a difference. Plus, it’s neat that Godsey is the co-founder of the Ohio Innocence Project, and in particular, works and lives in my city of Cincinnati.

The main thesis, if I can cobble it all together into one, of Godsey’s book is that prosecutors, police officers, judges, forensic scientists, witnesses, jurors, and criminal defense attorneys, broadly speaking, are not “evil.” They ae good people who genuinely think they are doing the right thing within the criminal justice system they operate in, and have often dedicated their entire lives to. In other words, basic human failings, not direct evilness, undergird all of the aforementioned professions, which informs the (mistaken) actions taken in the criminal justice system leading to wrongful convictions, and then fighting the exonerations of those wrongfully convicted. When you’ve created you entire self-image around being a good person and someone fighting for justice, as Godsey says, it’s difficult to confront the fact that you were not just wrong, but that your wrongness kept an innocent person locked up for a crime he or she didn’t commit, often for decades. The psychological name for this tension is cognitive dissonance, and that leads prosecutors, police and judges to resist change and to fight exonerations.

From this thesis, flows a number of other psychological issues Godsey highlights, such as administrative evil (it is well-documented in psychology and sociology how much group dynamics, such as a large bureaucracy (a prosecutor’s office, a police department, and the overall criminal justice system itself), can lead to going along with the group and dislodging that from you own personal morality, if necessary), dehumanization (seeing people accused of crimes as monsters, the “bad guy,” and even always referring to them as “the suspect” or “the defendant”), confirmatory bias (which I have to be self-aware is something that could be capturing me while reading this book!), issues with our memory of events we either directly experienced or only witnessed, and thinking humans are highly proficient “human lie detectors.” Spoilers: We’re not, at all. Human beings, even those supposedly trained up and with decades of experience, such as police officers, are barely better than mere chance (flipping a coin), if that, at ascertaining whether someone is lying or not. Body language is related to that issue, and so much of the nonsense in actual trials and what you see in our media (true crime media and otherwise) is based on nothing more than body language interpretation (voice falls into this, like trying to interpret the voice patterns of someone calling 9-1-1). In that way, body language interpretation is its own form of junk science.

Other forms of junk science highlighted in the book (and I’m probably forgetting some) include: hair sample analysis, handwriting sample analysis, fingerprint analysis (yes), shoe print analysis, tire tread analysis, bullet analysis, blood splatter analysis, bite mark analysis, and gunshot residue analysis (yes).

My parenthetical “yeses” might be a surprise to even those who have paid attention to the field, but there are abundant issues within those “sciences,” too.

Basically, the only truly independent, duplicatable science within forensics is DNA-matching, and that isn’t as ironclad as people think, either, but at least it’s actual science.

Additional areas of concern in the criminal justice system: Drug tests, eyewitness testimony (the leading cause of wrongful convictions), ]=false confessions (coerced and ones where police get the person to think they’ve truly committed the crime), and tunnel vision by police and prosecutors. Juries also have issues, of course, whether assuming a white coat forensic expert must, well, be an expert, or assuming if prosecutors brought a case to trial, then the person must be guilty, or the body language issue, or a myriad other issues that “contaminate” juries actually arriving at anything approaching the truth and justice.

Godsey also goes over the various pressure points, psychological and political, that affect all of the aforementioned professions. I think the most interesting one Godsey addresses is the issue of judges and prosecutors at the state and county level being elected to their positions. To be re-elected, judges need to appear “tough-on-crime” and they often seek the endorsement of prosecutors, which makes that an obvious conflict of interest. I would argue, however, that the issue there goes back to the elephant in the room problem inhibiting criminal justice reform more broadly: Us! The American public. Judges wouldn’t have to campaign on being “tough-on-crime” and Democrats, Godsey assesses, wouldn’t have to over-compensate to appear tough-on-crime, if the American public didn’t want that. But they do. Such campaigning works for a reason. Obviously, not everywhere, as there have been successful criminal justice reform-minded prosecutors and judges elected throughout the United States. But it’s not easy (and they often face strong opposition from police unions, which is another issue).

Finally, one of the broader problems Godsey addresses at the end of the novel, which is music to my choir ears, is that the incentive model is all wrong. Unlike in the private market, there is no feedback mechanism that forces police, prosecutors, judges, and criminal defense attorneys to correct for their mistakes, and be “rewarded” for correcting those mistakes. In fact, the incentives all run in the opposite direction.

But again, this isn’t a doomsday book. Godsey’s basic few solutions include:

- Eyewitness identification: Officers doing a photo line-up should employ the double-blind, sequential method to ensure they aren’t consciously or unconsciously influencing the witness (making it double-blind makes it more scientific and sound!).
- Interrogations: Interrogations should always be videotaped from beginning to end, and those tasked with training officers should rethink their method of interrogation in the first place.
- Jailhouse snitches (ugh): A few places have tightly controlled this issue by having a committee vet the “snitches,” which weeds out a lot of the problematic noise.
- Forensics: Blinding (just like with witness identification) to erase confirmation bias, such as removing forensic agencies from the control of law enforcement and the prosecutor’s office, aka ending that cozy relationship with wrong incentives; and we need to ensure more forensic disciplines are actually sound sciences.
- Defense attorneys: Leveling the playing field, so the criminal defense attorneys can adequately defend their clients.
- Police and prosecutors: Both professions should receive better training on the dangers of tunnel vision.
- Elections of judges and prosecutors: Immunizing both from the pressures of partisan elections, where both would be appointed by bipartisan commissions.
- Conviction Integrity Units, or CIUs: I see this as one of the most promising on the list. These CIUs have been set up in various prosecutor’s offices in the United States, and if they have the proper buy-in, they are actually exonerating more innocent people than even the best state chapter of the Innocence Project can ever hope to. That’s telling.

I would also add, incentivized by all of the psychological and political issues Godsey mentions, we have a pervasive issue in the United States where the vast majority of cases don’t even reach trial in the first place. Prosecutors wield far too much power and discretion in that area. This would partly be fixed by Godsey’s suggestion of leveling the playing field between defense attorneys and prosecutors; if a defense attorney could actually put forth a proper defense, then prosecutors lose their fear factor leading to guilty pleas, to some extent. Some have argued with abolishing plea bargaining altogether. I haven’t read much into reforms in that area, but my confirmation bias brain likes the sound of it.

Overall, if you are someone who considers yourself a true crime junkie, but anything I’ve said seems foreign to you, you owe it to yourself and your junkie obsession, to educate yourself via Godsey’s book. Same if you’re not true crime obsessed and have even less of an understanding of how the criminal justice system actually operates. And for the already-converted like me, it’s always helpful to have a handy resource like Godsey’s book and crucially, to be reminded of the real-world cases throughout his book because the innocent people are who we are fighting for.

[Laura Baguette · Rating 4 out of 5]

An incredible look into the faults of our justice system while making sure readers keep their hope. I totally recommend for anyone who is interested in law, psychology, or non fiction in general. I won’t lie I did skim a page or two (as one usually would when it’s an assigned reading) but I am grateful for what I learned

[Joanna · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was an interesting read, though I had hoped it would add to my knowledge of wrongful convictions in a way which it did not. So I think this book is definitely more suited for people with limited knowledge, not someone who works in this field as I do.

However, this book did provide a terrifying insight into the minds of prosecutors, even our author who seems to have seen the light and realises how fallible the criminal justice system he makes many excuses for the poor and downright criminal behaviour of law enforcement and criminal justice practitioners. He by in large takes the position that these people who knowingly and willfully put their own careers and reputations before justice are not bad people who mean to cause harm. While I don't believe every practitioner that makes a bad choice is a bad person he fails to truly condemn the people who are. These practitioners are adults who presumably went through some kind of criminology based education and therefore there is no excuse for this behaviour.

Also while I'm glad he at least acknowledged institutional racism at the beginning of the book I think it is absolutely a cop-out to say 'its too big of an issue so just know its an issue but I'm not going to examine why'. Wrongful conviction is intrinsically and inextricably linked to racism and thus poverty and white supremacy. It is no coincidence that many victims of wrongful conviction are POC and many of the practitioners and victims in the actual case are white.

All in all, this provided some interesting insight, while not really useful for anyone with a criminology background it is more suited to someone with limited knowledge. However in saying that, it's a failure to properly examine race and its lenient stance on criminal justice practitioners responsible makes it read more like propaganda that is designed to draw attention to the issues in the system and how to fix them while minimising the responsibility of the corrupt and selfish practitioners who are responsible. Therefore, I don't think this is necessarily the best source of information for someone who isn't educated enough on the subject matter to see through some of the bullshit.

[Kyla Voelz · Rating 1 out of 5]

I am only on page 35 but i don't know how much more I can read. I feel like i keep reading the same statements every few paragraphs.

[Smita · Rating 4 out of 5]

#blindinjustice by #markgodsey examines the flaws in our criminal justice system from the perspective of a hard-nosed prosecutor-turned #ohioinnocenceproject founder. Godsey explains how errors in forensic science (blood splatter analysis, tire tread analysis, fingerprint and handwriting analysis, etc), coupled with human flaws including confirmation bias are all instrumental in failing to convict the actual criminals. What results are false convictions and imprisonments of innocent people.

Godsey provides several specific cases to prove the pervasive nature of such flawed practices in our justice system, including the case of Rick Jackson who had been wrongfully convicted and charged based on the false eyewitness testimony of a 12-YO boy who was coerced by police interrogators; he was finally freed after 39 years in prison, making Jackson the longest-serving innocent inmate.

Curiously enough, among the anecdotes are multiple references to the #stevenavery and #brendandassey cases. A controversial investigation with many examples of what can be interpreted as police misconduct, this case which was featured in the documentary #makingamurderer takes front and center stage several times in Godsey’s book. Though he never comes out and says it, one can’t help but wonder if Avery has truly been victimized a second time by a flawed and corrupt judicial system.

This should definitely be required reading for anyone in law enforcement as it encourages those with inordinate power to be unbiased and open minded. The book concludes with several actionable solutions that would greatly mitigate the number of wrongful convictions in the US.

[Connie · Rating 4 out of 5]

“As I’ll explain, the psychological flaws behind wrongful convictions are a triple-whammy. They not only contribute to the wrongful convictions in the first instance, but they make us unable to see or comprehend the errors as they are happening. In other words, they blind us to their impact. Then the same psychological problems cause us to deny the mistakes after-the-fact when a wrongful conviction is claimed 20, 30, or even 40 years later. In other words, the psychological issues at work create the problem, blind us to the problem as it’s unfolding, and then insulate the problem from introspection and discovery after-the-fact. As a result, we as a society are in collective denial about our biases, misperceptions, and memory problems. Prosecutors, judges, police officers, jurors, witnesses, defense attorneys, media reporters – everyone - have brought into the myths of the system and confidently go about their business unaware of the thin ice they are walking on. Though new breakthroughs in science and psychology are quickly eroding the myth of the past, players in the system by and large ignore them, resist the 'new,' and confidently assert their opinions in ignorance of their flimsy foundations.” p. 7

“I now tell my students working in the [Ohio innocence Project] that while their instincts about whether a witness is lying or telling the truth should not be totally disregarded, their gut reactions should never be viewed as very important factors in the overall investigation. Judge on the hard evidence, I tell them, not on demeanor. But this is a hard lesson for the students to learn. Our societal belief in our lie-detection abilities is so ingrained that I still sometimes find students slacking on a case when they have not been moved by the demeanor of the inmate claiming innocence, or telling me that they are going to keep working hard on the case that appears dead in the water because they met the inmate and 'know' from his 'vibe' that he is innocent. I remind them that you can’t take your instincts to the bank. Humans are just not good lie detectors” p. 155

[Tina · Rating 5 out of 5]

I don't read a lot of nonfiction because I usually find it dry and boring; this book was anything but. It uses real cases to illustrate the problems with the US criminal justice system and the reasons why prosecutors and judges tend to fight tooth and nail against exonerating convicted people later found to be innocent -- even when the evidence of their innocence is clear and overwhelming. (Note: for the most part this is not malicious behavior; most of these prosecutors genuinely believe that they convicted the right person.)

Professor Godsey has a somewhat unique perspective, as a prosecutor turned innocence lawyer, and he looks back unflinchingly at his own behavior back in his days as a prosecutor, mentioning several examples where he himself fell victim to the very human flaws that can result in wrongful convictions. I think this book should be required reading for everyone in law enforcement, from police and prosecutors and judges to defense attorneys. Only when people recognize the common psychological factors behind wrongful convictions can they work to prevent them. Because as long as the people with all the power persist in convicting the innocent, who among us is safe?

[Sishi · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is a good book with a lot of interesting cases and fun quotations. The connection of theories and personal experience makes it easy to read. A beginner in the field of wrongful conviction and criminal justice would find it educational. After taking the course of wrongful convition and reading cases and textbooks, I found nothing unfamiliar in this book. PS with regard to DNA evidence, the author says it might be problematic just as other forensic evidence, but a lot of exonerations are based on DNA evidence. Indeed we have presumption of innocence and scholars in this field do not care about wrongful exonerations. However I do think it is worth remembering that if DNA evidence is problematic in proving guilty, it might also be problematic in throwing out guilty verdict / proving innocent.

[Miss Murder · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a must read.
Being a criminal justice student, I am very intrigued by the topic of wrongful convictions and all the encompasses it. I originally picked this up as part of a research project, and I am so glad I did.
Mark Godsey sheds light on this topic in a very different way, discussing things like cognitive dissonance and blind memory and how it relates to wrongful convictions. While most books discuss jury selection or ineffective legal representation, Godsey analyzes human error and fallibility, which is truly the heart of it all. Not only does he discuss this effectively with research, but he does so with his own personal experience as a former prosecutor turned wrongful conviction lawyer.
"Blind Injustice" is a thorough account of the politics and psychology behind wrongful convictions from Godsey's own eyes. This should be on any crime buffs' reading list.

[David Miraldi · Rating 5 out of 5]

In this insightful book, Mark Godsey explains how our criminal justice system can make horrible mistakes and then be unable to correct them. Godsey explores several psychological phenomenon: cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias to understand how jurors, attorneys, and expert witnesses get things wrong. He also show how the election of judges and prosecutors push them to be "tough on crime," and ignore exculpatory evidence. He also looks at tunnel vision, eye witness identifications, and our misconceptions about our ability to assess someone's credibility. Any of these factors can lead to a wrongful conviction.

The book explores these and many more issues, interspersing them with actual court cases that illustrate the points.

This book should be required reading for all judges and prosecutors!

[Lisa Lawhorn · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a great introduction to the problem of wrongful convictions. Mark does a great job of educating the reader while using interesting examples to explain how the psychological biases, junk science and political ambition impacts the civil rights of innocent people. The psychology is fascinating and the issues abound in many aspects of our legal system. I pray that more people read this book and watch movies like "Brian Banks" and "When They See Us" to understand the injustice that is happening and the changes needed.

[Adrienna · Rating 3 out of 5]

The author covered unjust and wrongful convictions, and these people served pretty long sentences to find out they were innocent. Ohio Project, and this attorney, has helped use DNA and show that there could be false lie detector testing, witnesses pick outs, and even photo drawings can put the wrong person in jail.

It took quite some time to read and due to other reads, I browsed through some of the last chapters. I really enjoyed the blind tunnel vision chapter.

[Kayla Lehn · Rating 5 out of 5]

I do have the background for a default interest in this, but I think this book is for everyone and anyone. Godsey’s ability to write for experts and the layperson alike is astounding and commendable. If you read this and then listen to a true crime podcast, watch an episode of dateline, or hear Nancy Grace’s voice, you’ll notice at least one (if not five) of the phenomena from this read. A favorite of 2019 for sure.

[Book Club Bandit · Rating 5 out of 5]

Frightening! This book shows how innate psychological flaws in judges, police, lawyers, and juries coupled with a "tough on crime" environment can cause investigations to go awry, leading to the convictions of innocent people.

This should be a must read for every criminal justice student. The psychology of why prosecutors often won't admit their mistakes even in the face of DNA evidence was of particular interest to me. Big changes are needed in the American criminal justice system.

[Leela · Rating 4 out of 5]

Blind Injustice provided a sweeping look at the flaws in the criminal justice system and had actionable suggestions for improvement. It had an underlying assumption that very few humans want to do evil, which I always appreciate. It’s much more interesting to investigate why someone does something than assuming that they just want needless suffering. I did feel like the anecdotes tended to go on a bit long and some of them were repeated in different chapters. 3.7/5

[Rob Lewis · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well-written, easy to read and terrifying analysis of the criminal justice system. Ruined cop shows for me but gives a good overview of how misattribution, tunnel vision and confirmation bias work in the minds a witnesses and investigators with or without administrative evil and noble cause corruption.

[Kat Rogers · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very good book, incredibly in depth. It gets to the heart of the problem of the fight for innocent people wrongfully convicted. Reading it made me see the issue in a light I never would have otherwise. I would have liked some conversation, even a peripheral glance, at the way racism intersects with wrongful convictions.

[Jessica · Rating 3 out of 5]

Makes some good points that have given me something to think about in my criminal defense practice, but he is VERY repetitive and VERY quick to justify his unethical or shitty behavior when he was a prosecutor (and on behalf of prosecutors and police everywhere). You do not get to knowingly cheat and still believe you're the "good guy" just out to get the "bad guy".

[Jessica Walton · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book, however it wasn’t what I expected. When I purchased it I had no clue that it doubles as a textbook/reference for those studying law/innocence projects. I thought it would contain more in depth stories of people who were wrongfully imprisoned and convicted. I enjoyed it just thought it would be a little different that’s all

[Harris · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very interesting read. I liked how the author kept the stories about his clients short and limited to the essential facts. My favorite parts of the book were the studies used to illustrate why certain members of the criminal justice process exhibit biases, preconceived notions, beliefs, etc.

[Vicki Frost · Rating 4 out of 5]

Really loved this book because I learned so much about how memory can be manipulated and how our justice system is stacked against anyone who may be suspected of a crime. So grateful for the Innocence Projects and others who are trying to fix what is wrong. Great read.

[Nancy · Rating 5 out of 5]

You think you can spot a liar or that your memory of an event is infallible? Think again! After reading this book I understand how horribly wrong justice can go at times and how unreliable witnesses are and the psychology behind why these mistakes happen.

[Haley · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm a doctoral student in legal psychology, so much of the information in this book was well known to me. But many of the concepts were explained really well.
I think the main draw to this was the insight into prosecutors, defence, and judges. The case details added a lot of value to the concepts.

[Jenna Dawson · Rating 5 out of 5]

When my husband was wrongfully convicted, I wanted to know how things go so wrong. This is the first of many books I read that explained why prosecutors will not let go when it is obvious that they have got it wrong and and are trying to convict an innocent person.