This case is about three people charged with the murder of two americans in Bwindi Impenetrable National Forest. This two americans were tourist in Western Uganda when they were killed by three people named Francois Karake, Gregoire Nyaminani, and Leonidas Bimenyimana. These defendants were arguing that they violated their miranda rights and that “their statements were products of physical and psychological coercion (United States of America v. Francois Karake, et al., 2006). The question that comes up a couple of times is if the confessions statements were actually voluntary. As you read it talks about a little bit about the group, how it failed but they kept going and got bigger and bigger as time went by. Tells us about the plane that was shot down and many …show more content…
These people took and Americans and other nationalities hostage but let the French tourist stay. They talk about how the hostages were murder and only 7 out of 15 survive. Two FBI agents were in charge of this murder investigation. They talk about Ndabarasa and the notes he had explaining how Karake and Nyamani testify that they were guilty of the murders of the two americans and also of the group of women. The problem here is that those notes don't match the the testimony and other evidence they had; Ndabarasa notes of his interviews fail to corroborate his testimony that Nymani took any responsibility for any of the killings” (United States of America v. Francois Karake, et al., 2006. While im reading this case I feel like they are self incriminating or snitching on each other. Would this help them avoid the death penalty or life in prison? It seems like at first they will testify something and a couple of days later deny it and say they never said that. My opinion on these long lasting interviews is that they might be “voluntary” because these people actually get tired of many questions in one day and they just admit to anything or saying any bogus stories to get out of interrogation