Look no further than State v. Barbero, 297 Or.App. 372 (2019). An admission is a statement made for some purpose other than to acknowledge guilt. A confession is an acknowledgement of guilt made by a person after an offense has been committed.

For example, “It’s true I was at the house the day poor Fluffy was incinerated, your Honor, but I assure you I did not smell a thing” is an admission.

“Ok, fine, I did it! I shoved the cat in the oven on purpose!” is a confession.

The distinction is legally relevant.

A confession alone is not sufficient to support a conviction for a crime. There must be some additional evidence, other than the confession, from which you may draw an inference that tends to establish or prove that a crime has been committed. When the state presents evidence of a confession at trial, the defense is entitled to a jury instruction about that. When the state presents evidence of an admission, however, the instruction is not given.

Fun fact: An admission can itself serve as corroboration for a confession. Therefore, a defendant’s combined statements can, in theory, be enough to support a conviction.

Barbero is an Oregon State case, but the same general principles apply in most U.S. jurisdictions, though the exact corroboration rules vary by state. Federal courts follow a similar but not identical approach.

So, if you’re wondering: what is the difference between an admission and a confession, this is it in plain terms.