CJ 2500 FINAL PAPER

1

Interviews are conducted in criminal cases for the purpose of gathering information

from people who have or may have knowledge needed in the investigation.

The information may come from a victim or from a person who has no other

relationship to the criminal activity other than being where he or she was at the time.

Interrogation is designed to match acquired information to a particular suspect to

secure a confession.

There are four commonly recognized objectives to the interrogation process.

1. To obtain valuable facts.

2. To eliminate the innocent.

3. To identify the guilty.

4. To obtain a confession.

As in interviewing, the success of an interrogation depends on a number of

personal characteristics and commitments of the investigator. Planning for personal characteristics and commitments of the investigator. Planning for

and controlling the events surrounding both interviews and interrogations are

important, but are generally viewed as more critical to the success of an

interrogation.

Establishing rapport, asking good questions, carefully listening and proper

documentation are elements common to both forms of obtaining information. documentation are elements common to both forms of obtaining information.

Of paramount importance are the myriad of legal requirements attendant to

interrogations that are absent in interviews.

The effective interviewer/interrogator must be knowledgeable in the art and science

of criminal investigation and know how to use psychology, salesmanship, and

dramatics.

Persuasiveness and perseverance are essential to success. The

interviewer/interrogator must make himself or herself easy to talk to. By the

appropriate use of vocal inflection, modulation, and emphasis, even the Miranda

warnings can be presented to a suspect in such a way as not to cause the suspect

to immediately assume a defensive posture. The words can be spoken without

creating an adversarial atmosphere. The interviewer/interrogator must have a

flexible personality and must be able to convey empathy, sympathy, anger, fear, and

joy at various times, as needed, but must always truly remain objective.

It is important that the interviewer/interrogator keep an open mind, receptive to all

information regardless of its nature.

Police officers conduct interviews in a number of situations. The most

common is the on-the-scene interview.common is the on-the-scene interview.

The physical circumstances under which the interview takes place can be

critical to the value of the information obtained.

Although convenience of the witness is important to a successful interview,

the interviewer need not relinquish the psychological advantage in selecting

the time and place of the interview.

Privacy is of the utmost importance in conducting interviews.

The physical and emotional states of the witnesses are important in

conducting or in determining whether to conduct an interview.

The success of both the interviewer or interrogator and the interview or interrogation will

often be determined by the time and dedication committed to preparing for the interview or often be determined by the time and dedication committed to preparing for the interview or

interrogation. Both the interviewer or interrogator must become familiar with the facts of the

case under investigation and the victim.

A Witness

If the interview is to be conducted with a witness other than the victim, the interviewer

should find out as much about the witness as possible before conducting the interview

including motivations, perceptions and barriers that might exist.

The Offense

It is necessary that the investigator know specifically what crime or crimes were allegedly

committed.

The Victim

The victim is a person, the investigator should learn as much as possible about his or her

background, the nature of the injury or loss, attitudes toward the investigation, and any

other useful information, such as the existence of insurance property crime case.

The interrogator must evaluate himself or herself and the conduct of the interrogation and

must begin to evaluate the suspect.

The Suspect

The investigation should reveal as much personal background information on the suspect

as can be obtained.

Many investigators find it useful to complete a pre-interrogation checklist to assist

them in adequately preparing for their meeting with the suspect.

Information provided by eyewitnesses to a criminal event is relied on heavily by both

the police and courts in the investigative and adjudication stages of our system of

justice, yet research indicates that eyewitness testimony may be unreliable.

Human perception and memory are selective and constructive functions, not exact

copiers of the event perceived—constructive in that gaps will be filled to produce a

logical and complete sequence of events.

Experts distinguish a number of factors that limit a person’s ability to give a

complete account of events or to identify people accurately. The following are

among those factors.

1. The significance or insignificance of the event.

2. The length of the period of observation.

3. Lack of ideal conditions.

4. Psychological factors internal to the witness.

5. The physical condition of the witness.

6. Expectancy.

The use of hypnosis as a means of aiding witnesses in recalling facts buried in the

subconscious is often thought to overcome many of the difficulties experienced in

seeking accurate human memory.

Hypnosis is often erroneously believed to be a form of sleep. In fact, it is the

opposite. It is best described as a state of heightened awareness in which the

subconscious is somewhat surfaced and the conscious is somewhat repressed.

In this altered state of consciousness, the subject of hypnosis has a heightened

degree of suggestibility, or hypersuggestibility.

Hypercompliance, closely related to hypersuggestibility, is a desire on the part of the

hypnotized subject to please the hypnotist or others who have supported the

hypnosis effort.

The third major area of concern about reliability of hypnotically enhanced memory is

referred to as confabulation.

Several decades ago, Richard Bandler and John Grinder recognized that

communication could be enhanced if the words and actions of the interviewer and

interviewee were similar; thus, if the interviewer could “mirror” the words and actions

of the witness or suspect, rapport would be more easily established.

Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) embraces three simple concepts.

First, neuro comes from the idea that behavior originates from neurological

processes involving the five senses—seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and feeling.

It is through these senses that we experience life.

Programming refers to how we organize our ideas and actions to produce results.

An interviewer/interrogator that understands these concepts and can get in “sync”

with the witness or suspect by mirroring or matching mannerisms, actions, and

words can make communication barriers disappear, foster trust, and create the flow

of desired information.

Regardless of the time, place, or setting of the interview, or ultimately the type of

witness or victim interview, there exists some standardization in technique.

An interview has a beginning, a middle (its main segment), and an end

The cognitive interview technique was developed in the hope of improving the

completeness and accuracy of eyewitness accounts while avoiding some of the

legal pitfalls that surround the use of hypnosis.

The first step is to ask the witness to reconstruct the general circumstances

surrounding the incident.

Second the investigator asks the witness to report everything remembered about

the incident and all surrounding circumstances.

Step three is to have the witness recall the events in a different order.

The fourth technique is to have the witness change perspectives.

Ernesto Miranda v. Arizona

The legal requirements pertaining to interrogations became of critical concern

during the 1960s, and, as a result, the Supreme Court handed down a landmark

decision that has dramatically affected the conditions under which interrogations

take place.

The Supreme Court, in a five to four decision, spelled out the requirements and

procedures to be followed by officers when conducting an in-custody interrogation of

a suspect.

The right to remain silent.

The right to be told that anything said can and will be used in court.

The right to consult with an attorney prior to answering any questions and the right

to have an attorney present during interrogation.

The right to counsel. If the suspect cannot afford an attorney, the court will appoint

one.

It is common practice for the officer to ask the suspect if he or she understands the

rights as they have been explained. If the answer is yes, then the officer may ask if

the subject wishes to talk with the officer. At this point, the alternatives open to the

suspect are four:

The suspect may choose to remain silent.

The suspect may request counsel.

The suspect may waive his or her rights and agree to talk with police without the

benefit of counsel.

There are certain basic rules an interrogator should keep in mind when composing

and asking questions. For example, questions should not be complex. Questions

should be short, direct and confined to one topic.

Deception is not always easy to detect but in general, there are both verbal and

nonverbal cues that can be examined to determine whether a suspect is telling the

truth or is being deceptive.

Verbal Signals. Verbal signals are generally easier for a deceptive subject to control

than nonverbal signals.

Nonverbal Signals: Body Language. There are generally far more nonverbal signals

and behavior than there are verbal.

Identical techniques do not work for all interrogations. Approaches and questions

differ with the type of suspect being questioned.

The logical approach is based on common sense and sound reasoning.

The emotional approach appeals to the suspect’s sense of honor, morals,

righteousness, fair play, justice, family pride, religion, decency, and restitution.

A sympathetic approach that gives the suspect a way out of a predicament can

often be successful and because the suspect is offered the opportunity to save face,

confessions are sometimes forthcoming.

When a suspect’s guilt is uncertain, the interrogator should begin with an indirect

approach, assuming that the interrogator already possesses all necessary facts.

The “Mutt-and-Jeff,” or good-guy/bad-guy, approach to interrogation works in some

cases.

Playing one person against the other sometimes works when there are at least two

suspects, both of whom swear they are telling the truth during separate

interrogations.

Regardless of the amount of their preparation and experience investigators or

interrogators can conduct a fully successful interview only if they are good listeners.

Listening is as valuable in interview and interrogation as is questioning.

To be effective, one must be an active listener, too. It has been estimated that 65

percent of communication is nonverbal.

25

26