When are confessions considered not voluntary?

Confessions are considered not voluntary when threats or promises are made by a person in authority because such influences can undermine the free will of the accused. In legal terms, a confession must be made voluntarily and without coercion to be admissible as evidence. If a person in a position of authority, such as police officers or investigators, exerts pressure on the accused through threats of harm, the possibility of dire consequences, or offers of leniency, it creates an environment where the confession cannot truly be said to be freely given. This fundamentally challenges the integrity of the confession, as it raises concerns about its reliability and whether it reflects the actual guilt of the accused or merely a response to coercive tactics.

In contexts where the other factors like duress, intoxication, or the mere fact of recording a confession are considered, they do not carry the same weight as the direct impact of coercive influences from authorities. Duress relates more to external pressure and could encompass a broader range of influences beyond mere authority. Intoxication, while it can impair judgment and the ability to make sound decisions, might not automatically invalidate a confession unless it can be shown that the intoxication severely compromised the person's capacity to understand or be aware of what they were confessing to