Solvi Updyke '26: Global Online Academy Capstone Showcase

Solvi's capstone project for her Global Online Academy (GOA) class, Prisons and Criminal Justice Systems, was nominated for inclusion in GOA's 2025–26 Capstone Showcase—one of 82 projects selected out of over 1,400 submitted! We sat down with Solvi recently to learn more about her research, as well as her overall GOA experience. Read the interview below.

What inspired you to research this particular topic?

The class was about prisons and criminal justice systems, and one of the first assignments was to do a case study. We were given several cases that had a lot to do with police behavior, and in some cases, police brutality. The one that I chose was more centered around misconduct and negligence. I was really interested to explore that case, which was about Miss Dhu, a woman in Australia who was detained and died in prison because she was refused adequate medical attention. I learned that a lot of that had to do with the medical professionals not conducting full examinations, and I couldn't understand why. Then I read an article that talked about how they based their diagnosis off of the police notes, which included biases: for example, "she's on drugs;" "she's experiencing withdrawal;" assumptions that they couldn't actually prove that were written in the notes, that then factored into the decision that the medical professionals made. I was really captivated by that idea, that there is so much influence from a thing that you don't even think of as significant. Obviously, there are police reports, and those are the more polished versions of these notes. You would think that a police note is for the officer themself, but that didn't seem to be the case here. As we kept going, I kept seeing how these notes would come back in later in the trial process. It kept coming back and weaving in, in different ways, and I was really interested in exploring that. I wanted to understand the full scope of influence that these notes had.

What surprised you the most while researching this topic?

I did a lot of research that was psychology-based, which explored how it's the natural human instinct to cater towards yourself, or to see things and believe things that cater to your own position. So if an officer makes a choice on the scene, the things they write down are going to support their choice. That made sense to me, these psychological tendencies. What's very interesting to me is the relationship between police officers and prosecutors, and the many instances that have recently been surfacing in media, where police officers are just lying. It's not a different perspective, a different way of seeing it—it's lying. This doesn't happen all the time by any means, but there are cases of it: for example, George Floyd. That was a rare case where we were actually able to see the evidence that disproved their reports—and that involved many officers. I was really surprised to learn that prosecutors, in the system, are supposed to be a check to police power and police discretion. In their position, they are supposed to say "I don't believe you made the right choice, I'm not going to take your case;" or, "I'm going to push for further investigation so that I can see if you actually used your discretion in the way you're supposed to." That doesn't really happen, because there is a really codependent police and prosecutor relationship. Within the bigger system, if a person working in a prosecutor's office were to "turn on" a police officer, they could risk their job. There's an alignment: the police bring the prosecutors their cases, and they are supposed to accept what the police officer says is true as the truth. I was shocked to learn that prosecutors are supposed to check that power, because I wasn't seeing that happening. 

How do you hope that research like this will work to change the system? What changes would you like to see?

In terms of researching and becoming informed, I think that's really important, especially after learning about the whole scale of the criminal justice system. There is so much to know, and we really went over every individual topic—not in intense detail, but enough so that I can understand it and walk someone through it. There are so many little pieces like this—like police notes; what are they writing down at the crime scene, and where is that going? People really have to put effort into being informed about things like that. And then just sharing it—it's unrealistic that everyone is going to take a really detailed class in criminal justice, but now that I know this, I feel it's important for me to share this. I think we need people who are willing to look at these individual pieces, because one person can't cover it all.

In terms of reforms, I think there needs to be a standardization in training and guidelines for officers. In my research, I found basically no guidelines relating to what's expected of an officer when they are taking notes at the scene. What's expected of police reports is very vague. Police training isn't standardized. I think that specifically for writing reports and taking notes, that should be standardized, and officers should be held accountable. There should be routine check-ins, perhaps from the state government. The reports should be looked over at some point. I think if officers were more routinely held accountable, then they would be more willing to put in the work. With the influence they have, isn't always an intentional thing—maybe they've had a bad day and are vague in their report, and then that report totally affects the outcome of the case, and affects the defendant and potential victim. I think we need to make people conscious of that, and the influence of psychological biases on the final outcome.

I also think it's important to remove some of the authority of the police report; right now, it's one of the sole documents that determines someone's fate, especially because 97% of cases end in a plea deal rather than going to court. The plea deal is just an interaction between the defense attorney and the prosecutor, in which they agree on a punishment that seems "fair" in exchange for the defendant pleading guilty. People are often pleading guilty to things that they didn't do, because they don't want to go to court; they don't want to wait in prison, and then maybe lose and receive a worse punishment. In those discussions, they are really drawing a lot from the police report. The police report is not actually viable evidence in court, but that doesn't matter when 97% of cases aren't going to court. I also think that defense attorneys don't have enough access to the investigation, resulting in an unfair power dynamic where the prosecutor is coming in knowing so much more. How can you accurately and appropriately defend someone when you don't have all the details? I think the full investigation should be open to the defense attorney, and should include a lot more than just the police report.

What has been your experience with GOA? What would you say to a student considering taking a GOA course?

I would say that it's a really special opportunity that we have. I would never have been able to take this class—and this is the second class I've taken: I took Introduction to Legal Thinking over the summer. It provides you with a really unique opportunity to explore very specific topics. It's a lot of work—you have to be really willing to put in the work, but you just learn so much. Now I know so many words, concepts, ideas, that are important to me. Everyone should know these things—they should not be irrelevant to us. GOA really provides that global perspective, because you're working with people all over the world. It really opens up your worldview. It's just such a unique experience—getting to work with people you would otherwise never have the chance to meet. It's a great opportunity, and I don't think you even need to know exactly what you want to do. There were so many classes that interested me, and I just chose one. It was worth it, because I've come away with so much knowledge, and a much more nuanced perspective.