John Lopez' stepfather was beaten and stabbed to death, and $170,000 in cash and jewelry was stolen from his safe. The police immediately identified Lopez and his friend as suspects, but they did not have enough evidence to bring charges against him. Lopez' mother repeatedly urged the police to solve the murder, and an officer informed her about the police's suspicions about Lopez. Subsequently, Lopez' mother allegedly assaulted him in a supermarket parking lot and later held a gun to him and threatened to kill him, herself, and his sister if he did not confess to the police. Days later, Lopez began 30 hours of police interrogation over a six day period. Lopez' mother participated greatly in the questioning. Lopez confessed to his complicity in the attack, as well as in a previous theft in his stepfather's home.
At trial, this confession was the primary piece of evidence in the prosecution's case against Lopez. The trial court denied Lopez' claims that the confession was coerced and that Lopez' mother acted as an agent of the police. The trial court also excluded the testimony of an expert witness, a psychologist, who was going to testify as to the voluntariness of the defendant's confession, on the grounds that the testimony was irrelevant in light of the trial court's decision that the confession was not coerced. Lopez was then convicted, and he appealed.
Holding: The trial court properly admitted the confession but improperly excluded the psychologist's expert testimony. The conviction was reversed. The court held that the evidence at trial was sufficient to support the trial court's finding that Lopez' confession was voluntary and that Lopez' mother was not acting as an agent of the police. However, the court, finding the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Crane v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 683 (1986), to be controlling, held that while the voluntariness issue had already been decided by the trial court, Lopez had the right to try and persuade the jury that his statements to the police were not credible.
 | Michael Welner, M.D. Chairman The Forensic Panel |
Dr. Welner comments: Popular perception has it that mothers are universally supportive and protective of their defendant children. This notion is bolstered by the tendency of many perpetrators to seek out their maternal figure when trying to evade capture. A famous recent example of an accused acting in this manner is O.J. Simpson.
This rationale, however, reflects more the perpetrator's perspective than the mother's; for the mother may experience profound remorse and a sense of personal responsibility for the crime, particularly a murder. On several occasions when interviewing the mothers of defendants, I have found them to empathize strongly with the family of the deceased even as they supported their loved one. For this reason, questioning the mother is not to be conceded as fruitless. Evidence of this approach can be found in the case of convicted serial killer Ted Kaczynski. Even with the overdramatized sacrifice attributed to his brother, his cooperation with authorities relieved considerable guilt.
Further complicating parent-child loyalties is a history of chronic antisocial behavior or drug abuse. Families may perceive to be held hostage by one member's selfish and indulgent pirating of monies, property, and space, particularly when this behavior strains the family equilibrium. It takes a lot of resolve to sign on to "tough love," but once this happens, family can be especially unforgiving.
Preconceptions are further challenged when the victim is family as well. In Lopez, the mother lost her husband, and was robbed in the process. Victims have a way of forgetting about the presumption of innocence, especially when they seek to deputize themselves as law enforcement to resolve a family tragedy. This situation does not negate the degree of influence the mother still has over the perpetrator as he experiences the stress of evading investigation or pursuit.
Mothers may strongly empathize with the victim's family.
Lopez illustrates the deterioration of the parent-child relationship well. The father's death was sufficiently disruptive to the mother's life for her to consider suicide as a remedy. She included her daughter's life in threats to the defendant which influenced him to talk. The conduct of Lopez' mother suggests an adamant belief that her son was responsible, and such a strong inclination to pursue justice with him that she disregarded how additionally disruptive it would be for the family to endure the disposition of this case. "Pistol packin' mama" now reckons with the trauma of a new trial, and with more than one life effectively lost.
