Psychology & Law 2000words essay

Sharonhy

Policeperceptionsofinvestigativeinterviewing.docx

Home >Law homework help >Criminal homework help >Psychology & Law 2000words essay

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Police perceptions of investigative interviewing: Training needs and operational practices in Australia

Edited by Becky Milne (1) and Karl A Roberts (2)

Introduction

In 1995, in Western Australia, Andrew Mallard was wrongfully convicted of the murder of Pamela Lawrence and sentenced to life imprisonment. It took several appeals over nearly 12 years for the true details of this case to come to light and in 2006, his conviction was quashed by the High Court of Australia. Mallard's conviction was predominantly based on two pieces of evidence. The first was notes obtained by police during his interview in which police alleged Mallard had made admissions. The second was a video-recording of the last 20 minutes of Mallard's 11 hours of interviews. The video depicts Mallard theorising as to how the murderer might have killed Pamela Lawrence. In essence, Mallard was convicted on the admissions purportedly given during unrecorded interviews and the partial video-recording of an interview ([13] Moston, 2009).

What eventually emerged was that the police hid evidence that would have invalidated Mallard's "theory" (police tests showed that the murder weapon Mallard suggested had been used, could not have caused the injuries to Pamela Lawrence), and similarly also hid evidence from witnesses that contradicted the case against him (for example, one witness described the likely killer as having a beard but no moustache, while Mallard had a moustache but no beard) ([13] Moston, 2009). When Mallard was finally released from prison, the Director of Public Prosecutions Robert Cock was far from apologetic, publicly stating that Mallard remained a prime suspect for the murder. Nevertheless, police involved in the case stated that a new "person of interest" had been identified (based on a new analysis of a palm print that had been found at the crime scene back in 1995). Shortly after being named as the new suspect, Simon Rochford, who was serving a life sentence for the murder of his girlfriend, committed suicide in his prison cell.

Police interviewing malpractice cannot only convict the innocent but also potentially set the guilty free or significantly hinder the evidence against a person of interest by ruling any evidence collected during a custodial interview inadmissible. One notable example of this is the Western Australian case against Dante Wyndham Arthurs in 2003 and 2006. In 2003, Arthurs was charged with sexually assaulting an eight-year-old girl in a park lane near his home. The case was dropped by the Director of Public Prosecutions as it was thought that the police questioning was "too aggressive" ([26] The Age , 2007). The failure to convict Arthurs in 2003 was to have disastrous consequences. In 2006, Arthurs was charged with the murder of eight-year-old Sofia Rodriguez-Urrutia Rey-Baltar-Shu who was found naked in a Perth shopping centre toilet cubicle.

At trial in 2007, the 2006 interview with Arthurs also came under court scrutiny and most of the interview including admissions was deemed inadmissible for exceeding acceptable boundaries. The Supreme Court Judge was critical of the manner in which detectives carried out the interview with Arthurs. In particular, in doubt was the voluntariness of Arthur's admissions and the following comments were made:

The circumstances relied upon as relevant to that assessment include the early morning events at the applicant's home, his lack of understanding the caution, his requests for a lawyer, the moral exhortations by the detectives, and in general the circumstances of questioning said to amount to persistent and undue pressure ( Arthurs v. The State of Western Australia [2007] WASC 209 ).

Despite the problems with his confession, Arthurs was sentenced to life in prison with no parole making him one of three Western Australians to have their papers marked "never to be released".

These cases demonstrate the importance of good interviewing practice both in relation to legislative compliance but also interviewing skills and competence demonstrated by the detectives who carry out interviews with suspects. Poorly conducted interviews may result in false denials, court acquittals and, in rare cases, false confessions resulting in miscarriages of justice. Lessons can be learnt from other countries that have had similar experiences, in particular, the UK.

Investigative interviewing in the UK has gone through dramatic changes over the last few decades. As miscarriages of justice came to light in the 1970s, which largely stemmed from interviewing malpractice, the UK police were subject to scrutiny over the tactics they were employing during interviews with suspects ([22] Savage and Milne, 2007). As a result of increasing public concern over the nature of interviewing tactics during suspect interviews, a Royal Commission on Criminal Procedures (1981) was conducted. Shortly after, in 1984, the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) was implemented one of its major innovations was the mandatory electronic recording of suspect interviews. The interviewing process suddenly became transparent and was thus open to external scrutiny and what was to follow was a plethora of research examining the interview process.

One of the most concerning research findings to arise from police interviewing studies was that oppressive interviewing tactics were relatively common during custodial questioning ([2], [3] Baldwin, 1992, 1993; [8] Irving, 1980; [9] Irving and McKenzie, 1989; [14] Moston and Engelberg, 1993; Pearse and Gudjonsson, 1998; [20] Phillips and Brown, 1998; [23] Softley, 1980; [28], [29] Williamson, 1990, 1993). One notable post-PACE study analysed 600 video-recorded interviews of suspects' which revealed severe shortcomings in the skills demonstrated by the police during interviews with suspects ([2], [3] Baldwin, 1992, 1993). Baldwin explains that the major weaknesses identified were a lack of preparation, a general ineptitude, poor technique, an assumption of guilt, undue repetitiveness, a persistent or laboured questioning, a failure to establish relevant facts, and an exertion of too much psychological pressure.

Other research also included particular beliefs held by interviewers such as the ability to detect deception. Research has found that the detection of deception through observations of non-verbal cues is an almost entirely unreliable process ([27] Vrij, 2000). In a self-report study involving 631 police investigators across the US Kassin and Leo (2007) reported that 77 per cent of participants estimated that they were accurate at truth and lie detection. In contrast, research in the UK report accuracy rates among professionals obtained in laboratory studies ranging from 45 to 60 per cent, with a mean of 54 per cent. Presuming guilt has also been linked to ineffective interviewing practices ([16] Moston et al. , 1992). However, the ability to detect deception is a commonly perceived as an essential aspect of interviewing.

Overall, the numerous research projects highlighted the need for police forces to improve interviewing practices and training. A national investigative interviewing training program was subsequently developed that aimed to provide officers with skills necessary to conduct effective and ethical interviews with victims, witnesses and suspects with integrity and in accordance with the law ([18] Ord and Shaw, 1999). Another crucial step in improving interviewing practices at a fundamental level soon followed in 1992 with the formulation of "seven principles to investigative interviewing" approved by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and the Home Office Steering Group on Investigative Interviewing. The key notion underlying the principles was an emphasis on information gathering rather than focusing on securing a confession (Williamson, 1994). The project team responsible for ensuring the seven principles were adopted throughout the UK also aimed at ensuring the effective and ethical interviewing of all interviewees, be they suspects, witnesses or victims. They developed the "PEACE" model for interviewing a model based upon psychological theories and the initiative started to train all the operational UK police officers in the framework. PEACE being a mnemonic for the phases of the interview; planning and preparation; engage and explain; account; closure; and evaluation.

After a review in 2001, Clarke and Milne recommended significant changes to training and supervision. In the same year, the ACPO endorsed the implementation of the National Investigative Interviewing Strategy (NIIS). The purpose of the strategy was to provide a framework for further developing skills and deployment of interviewers. The original strategy consists of a five-tiered model which focuses on the experience, skills and previous training of each officer and the likely complexity of various types of interviewees and investigations. Further, the model recognises interviewing as a skill requiring regular maintenance, monitoring and evaluation ([5] Griffiths and Milne, 2005).

Australia appears to be experiencing a similar antecedent history as the UK, whereby miscarriages of justice are exposing the practices of police carrying out investigative interviews with suspects. While there has as yet been no coordinated response in Australia to miscarriages of justice or problems in interviewing, systematic social science research is slowly beginning to emerge, including several studies examining the perceptions of judges, prosecutors, defence lawyers, police officers, the public and even defendants ([4] Dixon, 2006; [12] Kebbell et al. , 2006; Moston and Fisher, 2007).

[1] Alison and Howard (2005) surveyed 51 sworn officers from South Australia Police (SAPOL) on attitudes towards suspect interviewing, the levels of satisfaction with training and what tactics (confession vs search for the truth) were being adopted by the police officers in suspect interviews. The authors found the majority of police officers stressed the importance of searching for the truth rather than obtaining a confession, both in terms of attitudes and tactics used in interviews with suspects. However, a large percentage (37.21 per cent) of officers admitted to having, at some point in their careers, used a variety of confession-seeking tactics. In addition, the results clearly highlighted a need for improvement in SAPOL's commitment to interview training, since 29 per cent of officers had received no further training since graduating from the police academy and of those who had, the time passed since training averaged nine years.

This Australian study aims to provide insight into a large sample of current Queensland police officers attitudes and practices regarding investigative interviewing. The main aims of this study were to examine:

- the satisfaction of current training and supervision provided in relation to investigative interviewing;

- perceptions of the importance of investigative interviewing; and

- operational skills and competence, in particular, beliefs relating to detecting deception and how frequently interviewing techniques (outlined in previous literature regarding suspect interviewing and those found in the PEACE model) were reportedly used in interviews with suspects.

Participants

Participants were 2,769 Queensland police officers. This included 2,140 males (77.3 per cent) and 629 females (22.7 per cent). Of the 2,769 officers 2,040 (73.6 per cent) were uniform officers, 382 (13.8 per cent) were detectives, 273 (9.9 per cent) were plain-clothes officers, and 74 (2.7 per cent) were from other role classification. Plain-clothes officers are those who have not yet been appointed as a detective but have generally served a minimum of three years general duties (uniform police) and are currently undergoing detective training. Other includes special emergency response officers, training instructors, forensic officers and intelligence officers.

The majority of participants (72 per cent) had conducted at least one interview with a suspect in the previous six months, with another 7.8 per cent having last conducted an interview in the previous 7-12 months.

Materials

Participants completed a purpose designed online survey. The survey aimed to collect data regarding participants attitudes, perceptions and practices regarding investigative interviewing while also considering information about the interviewers (i.e. their operational duties, years in the service, training in investigate interviewing). The survey included 52 questions and took approximately 10-20 minutes to complete. The majority of the questions were "tick-the-box" style questions, with open questions to examine reported percentages and reasons as to why the participants answered a particular question (i.e. reasons preventing adequate planning and preparation for suspect interviews).

Procedure

An invitation to participate in the study was e-mailed out to all sworn police officers of the Queensland Police Service (QPS) (reaching an audience of 9,725 police officers). Those agreeing to participate then clicked on a link directing them to the online survey. Respondents were not required to identify themselves in the survey. Responses were aggregated to prevent any possible identification of individuals.

Results

Current investigative interviewing training and supervision provided

Participants were asked to report whether they had received any training in investigative interviewing since completing academy training. Just over half (52.3 per cent) had received investigative interviewing training (47.7 per cent had not).

Participants were asked to rate their overall satisfaction with current QPS investigative interviewing training. Ratings were made on a five-point Likert scale (1=completely dissatisfied, 5=very satisfied). Only about a fifth (20.2 per cent) were satisfied (or very satisfied) with the training they had received, 38.3 per cent were dissatisfied (or completely dissatisfied) and the remainder (41.5 per cent) were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. Table I [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] shows participants who reported receiving investigative interviewing training since completing academy training were generally more satisfied with current training than those who had not. However, of those participants who had received investigative interviewing training since completing academy training a concerning 30.9 per cent of the respondents are either "dissatisfied" or "completely dissatisfied" with the current training.

Participants were asked how often they receive feedback from their supervisors regarding their investigative interviews and also how often they themselves review their own interviews. Just over half of the respondents (51.9 per cent) "never" received feedback. Similarly, about half (46.9 per cent) "rarely" or "never" evaluated their own interviews.

Importance and purpose of investigative interviewing

Importance

Participants were asked to rate how important investigative interviewing is in terms of:

- progressing an investigation; and

- report what type of evidence most typically produces the central lead in an investigation.

Participants rated importance of investigative interviews in progressing an investigation on a five-point Likert scale (1=not important; 5=very important). Over half said that investigative interviewing was "very important" (58.1 per cent), with an additional third (33.6 per cent) rating it as "important". Relatively few rated investigative interviewing as "moderately important" (7.9 per cent) and "somewhat important" (0.4 per cent). No officers gave a rating of "not important".

Participants were also asked to report what type of evidence they believed most typically produced the lead in solving a criminal investigation. The options were:

- physical evidence;

- interviews with victims, witnesses, and suspects;

- intelligence; and

- other.

Almost half the respondents (49.2 per cent) said interviews were the most important leads in solving investigations, with 40.9 per cent stating physical evidence, 5 per cent stating "intelligence" and 4.8 per cent stating "other" leads.

Purpose

Participants were asked to report what they believed was the main purpose for conducting an investigative interview with a suspect. Table II [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] shows the main purpose of conducting an investigative interview in ranked order.

Overall, results show that information gathering appears to be the main purpose behind conducting an investigative interview with a suspect. Of some concern here is the relatively high proportion of participants who indicated that obtaining a confession was the main purpose of an investigative interview (17.2 per cent).

Operational skills and competence

Time invested in planning and preparing a suspect interview

Participants were asked to report the amount of time they invest into planning and preparing for a suspect interview. Almost half of the participants (46.3 per cent) reported that they spend 0-15 minutes planning and preparing for a suspect interview. A further third (35 per cent) reported they spend 16-30 minutes planning and preparing. Very few participants reported spending an hour or more in planning and preparing for their suspect interviews (4.6 per cent). Participants also had an opportunity to report the reasons given as to why they were unable to invest sufficient time in planning and preparation for a suspect interview. Reasons given were high case loads and limited time allowed by supervisors.

Investigative interviewing skills

Participants were asked to rate their skills according to core investigative interviewing skills. These skills are classified as:

- planning and preparation;

- rapport;

- listening; and

- questioning skills.

Participants rated their skills on a five-point Likert scale (1=poor, 5=excellent). Results are shown in Table III [Figure omitted. See Article Image.].

Perhaps, not surprisingly, very few officers rated their interviewing skills as "below average" or "poor". About half of the respondents rated their skills at rapport and listening as "above average". Given the relatively short amount of time spent in planning and preparation, it is interesting to note that about two-thirds (64.5 per cent) of respondents rated their skills in this area as "average".

Detecting deception

Participants were asked to indicate whether they believe they can detect deception during an interview with a suspect. The majority (88.1 per cent) of participants (including 95 per cent of detectives) indicated they could detect deception during a suspect interview. Participants were also asked to report their confidence in:

- detecting the truth; and

- detecting lies.

Confidence was measured on a five-point scale (1=not at all confident, 5=very confident). Results are shown in Table IV [Figure omitted. See Article Image.].

There pattern of responses for detecting both truth and lies was very consistent. About 40 per cent of respondents were "confident" or "very confident" in their abilities. Very few admitted to be being "not at all confident" in either skill. Participants were also asked to report how often their assumptions of deceit turned out to be correct (out of 100 per cent). Participants reported a mean error rate of 78.65 per cent.

Finally, participants were asked to report what influenced their decisions in determining deception. Options were:

- non-verbal behaviour;

- verbal behaviour (suspects account);

- available evidence; and

- other.

The "other" option was an open response category where participants could provide their own reasons. Responses given here included gut feeling/instinct, experience, knowledge of the suspect and associates, inconsistencies in versions provided and behaviour which is abnormal. Respondents were allowed to give multiple responses to this question (percentages thus do not total to 100 per cent).

Table V [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] shows that the most commonly relied on cue to deception was non-verbal behaviour, but the available evidence and verbal behaviour (suspects account) were also endorsed by a majority of officers.

Interviewing tactics

Participants were asked to indicate what interviewing tactics they engaged in and to what extent during a suspect interview (1=never, 5=always). Interviewing tactics were based on the previous literature in the field and those found within the PEACE model ([25] Soukara et al. , 2008) and participants were given definitions of each tactic. In Tables VI and VII [Figure omitted. See Article Image.] the tactics have been grouped into:

- appropriate techniques; and

- inappropriate techniques, based on the previous literature ([25] Soukara et al. , 2008).

Overall, the results show that officers use a mixture of both appropriate and inappropriate tactics. Some interesting patterns emerge here. First, only a third of respondents (35.8 per cent) report "always" using open questions, with an additional half (49.4 per cent) "often" using this form of questioning. Second, some respondents report using disclosure of evidence either "never" (2.9 per cent), or "rarely" (12.3 per cent). Third, "inappropriate techniques" are used relatively frequently. Of particular concern here though is the use of the tactic of intimidation, with just over 40 per cent of respondents using this tactic at some time and a small percentage using it either "often" (1.2 per cent) or "always" (0.3 per cent). All the other "inappropriate" tactics are used by the majority of respondents.

Discussion

The main aim of this study was to obtain information in relation to police officers' attitudes and practices regarding:

- training and supervision of investigative interviewing;

- importance of investigative interviewing; and

- operational skills and competence in investigative interviewing.

Several interesting findings were obtained and highlight a need to develop an investigative interviewing framework that addresses identified training needs.

In relation to training, the results illustrate that almost half of the police officers that participated in the study had not received any training in investigative interviewing since graduating from their pre-service training. There also appears to be overall dissatisfaction with available investigative interviewing training with 38.3 per cent of participants reporting that they are either "completely dissatisfied", "dissatisfied" with the current investigative-interviewing training available. Interestingly, even those participants who have received investigative interviewing training reported either being "dissatisfied" or "completely dissatisfied" with the current training (39.9 per cent). These findings are consistent with other Australian research ([1] Alison and Howard, 2005) with police officers highlighting a need for organisational improvement in terms of commitment to interview training.

Participants indicated that investigative interviewing is highly important in progressing investigations. This finding is consistent with other overseas research ([11] Kebbell and Milne, 1998; [21] Sanders, 1986). Although participants believe investigative interviews are highly important there is a desire as identified above to provide additional training to develop skill levels.

The data regarding the level of evaluation given by supervisors in relation to participants investigative interviews indicated that the majority never or rarely receive any feedback. Self-evaluations of investigative interviews were also unusual. This is one major area highlighted by the UK research that is critical in developing officers interviewing skills and ensuring that skills obtained during training are transferred to the operational environment ([7] Clarke and Milne, 2001).

Participants' responses in relation to the purpose of an interview with a suspect were also in line with other research ([24] Soukara et al. , 2002) and official guidelines (ACPO NIIS, 2009) in that the purpose behind conducting a suspect interview is "to gather information" and "establish the truth" rather than focusing solely on obtaining confessions. Nevertheless, 17.2 per cent of all participants believed that obtaining a confession was the main purpose of an investigative interview with a suspect.

In relation to detecting deception, results indicated that a high portion of participants (88.1 per cent) reported that they can detect deception during a suspect interview. Confidence levels were rated as "very confident" or "confident" in detecting when suspects are either telling the truth (39.8 per cent) or telling a lie (40.8 per cent). Consistent with findings reported by [10] Kassin et al. (2007) this study also identified that participants who report that they could detect deception were over-confident in their accuracy levels (an average 78.7 per cent accuracy rate was claimed). These findings considerably exceed results from empirical studies where accuracy rates range from 45 to 60 per cent, with a mean of 54 per cent ([27] Vrij, 2000). Interestingly, the majority of the participants in this study (67.9 per cent) attributed their ability to detect deception to non-verbal behaviour. This is particularly interesting as non-verbal behaviour was the only option that cannot be used in court to secure a conviction (other options included available evidence, or the suspect's account). These findings highlight a common myth among police officer that non-verbal cues can be used to detect deception despite research indicating that non-verbal behaviour is an unreliable source in accurately detecting deception ([27] Vrij, 2000).

In relation to interview practices, in particular, skills such as planning and preparation, rapport, listening and questioning, participants rated themselves as average to above average. This is an interesting finding when put in relation to the data on training provision, satisfaction levels and time invested in planning and preparing for a suspect interview. For example, almost half the participants (46.3 per cent) reported investing 0-15 minutes planning and preparing for a suspect interview while the majority reported only investing up to 30 minutes (81.3 per cent). In the UK, experienced detectives ([24] Soukara et al. , 2002) rated planning and preparation as particularly important skills and it is recognised as a core skill in the "Investigative Interviewing: A Practical Guide" ([17] National Crime Faculty, 2000).

Questioning skills were rated as "average" by participants. The majority of participants use open questions "often" or "always" (85.2 per cent) during their interviews and over three quarters of the participants report "rarely" or "never" using leading questions (76.5 per cent). Although these findings appear encouraging, a clear training need can be identified since only a third of respondents (35.8 per cent) reported "always" using open style questions, and just under a third of respondents (29.9 per cent) indicated they "never" ask leading questions during suspect interviews.

Reported use of interviewing tactics in suspect interviews revealed a number of areas of concern. There appears to be a mixture of appropriate (information gathering) tactics and inappropriate (confession orientated) tactics. Findings illustrated both a lack of use of appropriate interviewing tactics and an over use of inappropriate interviewing tactics. Of some significant concern is that only a third of respondents report "always" using open questions and just over 40 per cent of respondents report using intimidation as an interviewing tactic, to some extent, during suspect interviews. These findings are in contrast with current UK research were the use of inappropriate or manipulative and persuasive interviewing tactics have been found to rarely exist during custodial interviews with suspects ([25] Soukara et al. , 2008). Notwithstanding, it is important to place these findings into context of other reported concerns identified in this study such as lack of investigative interviewing training, attitudes relating to the purpose of conducting suspect interviews and the lack of supervision and feedback. Nevertheless, the reported use of inappropriate interviewing tactics and lack of use of appropriate interviewing tactics highlight important training needs and concerns. The current Queensland data suggests a pattern of interviewing similar to that seen in the UK prior to the introduction of the PEACE model ([3] Baldwin, 1993; [8] Irving, 1980; [23] Softley, 1980). Tactics such as intimidation, minimisation, situation futility and maximisation, have been criticised because of their possible role in creating false confessions ([6] Gudjonsson, 2003). They are also at odds with an "ethical" approach to interviewing.

As mentioned earlier, in the last decade, Australia has seen a series of high-profile criminal cases come under court scrutiny due to improper interviewing practices, prompting a need to review and revise training in interviewing skills. This study found that almost half of police officers report not receiving any investigative interviewing training since graduating from the police academy. Furthermore, findings in this study reveal that police officers often use inappropriate interviewing tactics and hold false beliefs about cues to deception. These findings are interesting when the same police officers report that interviewing is highly important in progressing an investigation and also produces the most leads in an investigation. The same police officers also express dissatisfaction with current training in investigative interviewing.

Further systematic research is required to examine "operational" investigative interviewing practices (as opposed to perceptions) in Australia. Consideration also needs to be given to the development of investigative interviewing training frameworks that focus on the experience, skills and previous training of each officer. Moreover, interviewing needs to be recognised as a skill requiring regular maintenance, monitoring and evaluation.

Box I [Figure omitted. See Article Image.]

Journal of Applied Psychology

References

1. Alison, L. and Howard, J. (2005), "The interpersonal dynamics of police interviewing", in Alison, L. (Ed.), The Forensic Psychologist's Casebook, Willan, Cullompton.

2. Baldwin, J. (1992), "Video-taping of police interviews with suspects - an evaluation", Police Research Series Paper No. 1, Home Office, London.

3. Baldwin, J. (1993), "Police interview techniques: establishing truth or proof?", British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 33, pp. 325-52.

4. Dixon, D. (2006), "A window into the interviewing process? The audio-visual recording of police interrogation in New South Wales, Australia", Policing and Society, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 323-48.

5. Griffiths, A. and Milne, R. (2005), "Will it all end in tiers? Police interviews with suspects in Britain", in Williamson, T. (Ed.), Investigative Interviewing: Rights, Research, Regulation, Willan, Cullompton.

6. Gudjonsson, G. (2003), The Psychology of Interrogations and Confessions: A Handbook, Wiley, Chichester.

7. Clarke, C. and Milne, R. (2001), "National evaluation of the PEACE investigative interviewing course", Police Research Award Scheme, Home Office, London.

8. Irving, B. (1980), "Police interrogation: a case study of current practice", Royal Commission on Criminal Procedure Research Study No. 2, HMSO, London.

9. Irving, B. and McKenzie, I. (1989), Regulating Custodial Interviews: The Effects of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, Vol. II, The Police Foundation, London.

10. Kassin, S., Leo, R., Mesissner, C., Richman, K., Colwell, L., Leach, A. and La Fon, D. (2007), "Police interviewing and interrogation: a self-report survey of police practices and beliefs", Journal of Law and Human Behavior, Vol. 31, pp. 381-400.

11. Kebbell, M. and Milne, R. (1998), "Police officers' perception of eyewitness performance in forensic investigation", Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 138 No. 3, pp. 323-30.

12. Kebbell, M., Hurren, E. and Mazerolle, P. (2006), "An investigation into the effective and ethical interviewing of suspected sex offenders", Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, No. 327, Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra.

13. Moston, S. (2009), "Investigative interviewing of suspects in Australia", in Williamson, T., Milne, B. and Savage, S. (Eds), International Developments in Investigative Interviewing, Willan, Cullompton.

14. Moston, S. and Engelberg, T. (1993), "Police questioning techniques in tape-recorded interviews with criminal suspects", Policing and Society, Vol. 6, pp. 61-75.

16. Moston, S., Stephenson, G. and Williamson, T. (1992), "The effects of case characteristics on suspect behaviour during police questioning", British Journal of Criminology, Vol. 32, pp. 23-40.

17. National Crime Faculty (2000), A Practical Guide to Investigative Interviewing, National Crime Faculty and National Police Training, Bramshill.

18. Ord, B. and Shaw, G. (1999), Investigative Interviewing Explained, The New Police Bookshop, Surrey.

20. Phillips, C. and Brown, D. (1998), "Entry into the criminal justice system: a survey of police arrests and their outcomes", Home Office Research Study No. 185, HMSO, London.

21. Sanders, G. (1986), "The usefulness of eyewitness research from the perspective of police investigations", unpublished manuscript, State University of New York, Cited in Fisher, R.P., Geiselman, R.E., Amador, M. (1999). "Field test if the cognitive interview: enhancing the recollection of actual victims and witnesses of crime," , Vol. 74, pp. 72-727.

22. Savage, P. and Milne, R. (2007), "Miscarriages of justice", in Williamson, T. and Wright, A. (Eds), Handbook of Criminal Investigation, Willan, Cullomton.

23. Softley, P. (1980), "Police interrogation: an observational study in four police stations", Home Office Research Study No. 61, HMSO, London.

24. Soukara, S., Bull, R. and Vrij, A. (2002), "Police detectives' aims regarding their interviews with suspects: any changes at the turn of the millennium?", International Journal of Police Science and Management, Vol. 4, pp. 110-14.

25. Soukara, S., Bull, R., Vrij, A., Turner, M. and Cherryman, J. (2008), "What really happens in police interviews of suspects? Tactics and confessions", Psychology, Crime and Law, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 493-506.

26. The Age (2007), "WA police interviewing needs improving", The Age, September 18, available at: http://news.theage.com.au/national/wa-police-interviewing-needs-improving-20070918-zl8.html (accessed September 20, 2007).

27. Vrij, A. (2000), Detecting Lies and Deceit, Wiley, Chichester.

28. Williamson, T. (1990), "Strategic changes in police interrogation: an examination of police and suspect behaviour in the metropolitan police in order to determine the effects of new legislation, technology and organisational policies", unpublished PhD thesis, University of Kent, Canterbury.

29. Williamson, T. (1993), "From interrogation to investigative interviewing. Strategic trends in the police questioning", Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 3, pp. 89-99.