Psychology of the Defendant and his Testimony in Criminal Proceedings

The defendant is the main procedural subject and a party in criminal proceedings. Only a natural person who is procedurally competent to exercise their rights and duties can acquire the status of a defendant in criminal proceedings. The procedural competence of the defendant includes two fundamental characteristics – a certain age and mental health. The defendant’s testimony can only be obtained through interrogation. Interrogation of the defendant is an evidentiary action that consists of the defendant’s statement regarding the criminal offense he is charged with and falls into the category of personal evidence. The legal side of the defendant’s interrogation, which regulates his position and his set of rights and duties, as well as legally defined institutions ensuring equality with the opposing party (i.e., the prosecutor), represents a necessary form and condition for a court decision to be based on such evidence, in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code. However, aside from its legal dimension, the interrogation also entails psychological aspects. Accordingly, this paper analyzes the position of the defendant in criminal proceedings, as well as the psychological aspects of his participation and testimony before the competent authorities. Considering the rights and obligations of the defendant, the available legal means that ensure procedural equality with the prosecutor, but also the various pressures and mental states the defendant experiences (fear, uncertainty, discomfort, shame, humiliation, etc.), along with his motivation to actively participate in the proceedings, and his ability to remain silent or speak untruthfully, it is evident that the defendant can neither be unmotivated nor uninterested in the outcome of the proceedings. Therefore, it was essential to consider the role and significance of the defendant’s psychological functions and personality traits, which considerably influence both his ability to testify and the validity, truthfulness, and credibility of his statement. The paper is methodologically based on a theoretical, primarily desk-based analysis of relevant contemporary views in domestic and foreign theory, normative analysis of current legislative sources, inductive and deductive approaches in research, and descriptive analysis of indicators relevant to the psychology of the defendant and the psychological foundations of his testimony in criminal proceedings.