Criminal Interview, Interrogation and Confessions

Criminal Investigation - Interviews, Interrogations, and Confessions

The second half of the Principles of Investigations class focuses on Criminal Interviews, Interrogation and Confessions. The investigator uses these skills, techniques and strategies towards the goal of clearing the innocent and eliciting confessions from the guilty.

Investigators should leave no detail or nuance unexplored, not only of the suspect's behavior, but that of your own as well. In this segment of the class you will learn how to spot and interpret verbal and nonverbal behaviors of both deceptive and truthful people, and how to move toward obtaining solid confessions from guilty persons. We will study both, "The Reid Technique" which is built around basic psychological principles and Paul Ekman's "Facial Action Coding System" (FACS). FACS is a taxonomy of human facial expressions of emotion that are not culturally determined, but universal to human culture and thus biological in origin. These universal expressions include those indicating anger, disgust, fear, joy, sadness, contempt and surprise. These expressions are observable as "microexpressions" and "macroexpressions" and reliably detect deception.

You will learn how to obtain answers from a witness, a victim, or a suspect and how to interpret these answers with the utmost accuracy. Combining the Reid and Ekman techniques provides you the insight and understanding of the effective and proper way a suspect should be interrogated and the safeguards that should be in place to ensure the integrity of the confession.

Dr. Michael Thompson

Chapter 1

Characteristics of an Interview

By Brianna, Dalton, Tony, Skyler, Mark

An interview is nonaccusatory. Even if the investigator has clear reason to believe that the suspect is involved in the crime or has lied he should still not accuse. If the investigator does not accuse the suspect while interviewing him he can establish a much better rapport with the suspect that will assist him in an interrigation after the interview. If the investigator does not ask him in an accusitory tone than the suspect will be more likely to provide information about his or her access, opportunity, propensity, and motives. The only purpose of an interview is to gater information. During an interview the investigator should be eliciting investigative and behavioral information. A good place to start during and interview is how the suspect and the victim knew each other.

The next step could be getting the suspects alibi or figureing out his access to the crime scene. During the interview process the investigator should pay close attention to his behavior during responses. Look at his posture, eye contact, facial expressions, word choice, and response delivery. Ultimately, the investigator must make an assessment of the suspect’s of the suspect’s credibility when responding to investigative questions. An interview can be done early during an investigation. Because the purpose of an interview is to collect information, it can also be conducted before any of the evidence is analyzed or before any factual information about the investigation is known. Of course the more the investigator knows the more subsequent the interview will go. Except on a practical level the investigator should conduct an interview whenever possible. Regardless of sketchy facts or absence of evidence.

An interview can be conducted in many different enviroments. The best enviroment is a room that is designated for that purpose. Most of the time interviews are conducted whereever it is convenient to ask questions, for example in a persons home or office, in the back seat of a squad car, or on a street corner. Interviews are free flowing and relatively unstructured. The investigator does have specific topics to cover during the interview, the responses of the suspect may cause the investigator to ask questions he didnt plan on. The investigator must be prepared to follow up on these areas because the significance of the information may not be known until later during the investigation.

An interrogation is accusatory. Deceptive suspects are not likely to offer admissions against self-interest unless they are convinced that the investigator is certain of their guilt.

Google Images
Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian. Criminal Interrogation and Confessions. 4th Ed. 2004.——

Distinctions Between Interviews and Interrogations 1

Chapter 1
By: Jake Cox, Lindsay Frahm, Bryce Marble, Brittany Ellegood, Johnny Unruh, and Geoff Rohr

Interviews are a non accusatory conversation about a crime between an officer and a witness/suspect. Interviews usually take place at the beginning of an investigation and before the interrogation of a suspect. During an interview a guilty suspect will give more useful information. The behavioral responses of the suspect can help the investigator determine when the person is telling the truth, lying, or even possibly hiding evidence. Some of these responses include: eye contact, posture, facial expression, and word choice. The environment for an interview is a room designed for interview purposes.

Also, a person’s place of residence, office, squad car, or a street corner. Any information provided can be used at any point during the investigation. Due to this officers must ask question that pertain to the way that the suspect reacts with his/her expressions. Even if the suspect gives information not pertaining to the crime, officers should pay attention and listen to what is mentioned. This information could possibly help with the current investigation. Notes should be taken to insure that information doesn’t get lost.

In an interrogation investigators accuse the suspect of a crime that they may have committed. Investigators use behavioral techniques to determine if the suspect is lying or not. Also, these techniques: reactions, facial expressions, posture, and speech, can help the investigator get a confession better and faster without upsetting the suspect completely. During interrogations investigators must also you active persuasion. Investigators use tactics like using statements instead of asking questions. Doing this can allow the suspect to find a way out by confessing the truth. The purpose of interrogations is to learn he truth.

Some of the benefits of conducting an interview before a interrogation are: during an interview a suspect’s guilt is circumstantial behavior. The environment during an interview makes the suspect comfortable feel more obligated to speak with the investigator.

Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian. Criminal Interrogation and Confessions. 4th Ed. 2004.
Google Images: http://hits.astcorp.com/security/images/interview.jpg

Interrogation and Interview

Matt, Dan

This wiki is over interrogation, what we will be covering is how to NOT interrogate, apprehend and plainly not to torture a person. We will also go over some of the proper ways to interrogate and apprehend a suspect. In the video that this wiki is over, you will see clips from a movie, the news and an experiment to try and prove a theory. The theory in question is if water boarding is to be considered torture. The first section will be over the act of interrogating, the second will be over apprehending and the final section will be over water boarding. We will mostly focus on the first section.

During the video, you saw “Batman” interrogating the “Joker”, how he went about this was wrong, in few ways. First, the clothing should be more civilian like, not a caped costume or uniform. That tends to remind the suspect, in question, the consequences of his or her potential actions. If you for some reason you cannot wear more casual clothing, do not wear a coat and remove your badge, gun and holster. You must have respect while conducting an interrogation, so wear clothes more like a suit or a jacket. What you don’t see in the video is someone leading the “Joker” into the room. Another party besides the investigator should lead the suspect into the room. Once there he or she may read him or her, their Miranda rights, or other documentation. They must also introduce the investigator prior to their arrival, for two reasons: (1.) So the investigator does not need to do it him or herself. ( 2.) Is to diminish the confidence of the guilty suspect by bringing in a person of higher authority and an innocent suspect will be relieved to hear that a higher authority will be coming, to clear up the matter and not be falsely convicted.

Also in the video, you saw “Batman” manhandling the “Joker” and forcing up against the wall. The investigator should be seated around 5 feet away from the suspect, directly in front of them. The posture of the interviewer should be relaxed, not rigid, but in the movie you saw the interviewer leaning forward, this usually comes across as threatening. The suspect in the movie seemed to be a narcissist. It most likely was a personality trait. To overcome such suspects, who think they are superior, the technique used most is simply to keep your professional demeanor and having an emotional detachment. This kind of suspect will try to get out of trouble by lieing through omission than fabrication, so follow up with evasive answers. Frankly, “Batman” was probably not even qualified to interrogate the suspect, which was a fault on the police department.

This section is pretty much self-explanatory. So this section won’t be very long. In the video you saw a number of uniformed police officers apprehending a suspect via force. There a much better ways to go about apprehending a difficult suspect, other than beating them with nightsticks. Such as negotiations, tazers, dogs, bean bag guns. But at times you do need to use brute force and at other times, unfortunately, deadly force.
In the video, a radio host, mancow, wanted to see if water boarding is torture. After lasting about 5 seconds, he had to quit and says it was absolutely terrible. Water boarding is the act of tying a person down and pouring water down the breathing passages while the face is usually covered and their head is inclined downwards. It enacts the gag reflex immediately and causes extreme pain, lung damage, may cause brain damage due to oxygen deprivation and in extreme cases, death.

In conclusion, we went over what not to do in an interrogation and the proper of way of handling a suspect in an interrogation. We went over some other ways of apprehending a suspect. Finally we defined water boarding and if you watch the video you will see the actual act of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterboarding
http://www.easybib.com/
Inbau, Fred E., John E. Reid, Joseph P. Buckley, and Brian C. Jayne. Criminal Interrogation And Confessions. 4th ed. Sudbury, MA: Jones and BartlettPublishers, 2004. Print.

Obtaining and Evaluating Factual Information 2

Chapter 2
By: Bryce Marble, Lindsay Frahm, Jake Cox, Johnny Unruh, Geoff Rohr, and Brittany Ellegood

Before an interview is conducted you have to know some information known as “case facts.” The case a facts usually come from records and documents, victim and witness interviews, and from a review of investigative findings. “Fact Analysis” is also an important skill an investigator needs to know. This simply means being able to identify the factual information, the probably motivation for a crime, unique access requirements, and many more. Once this information is all put together hopefully they can put together who probably committed the crime.

When getting ready for an interview and hopefully before you have contact with the suspect, the investigator should try and become really familiar with all of the facts and circumstances of the offense. You should get this from the most reliable resources possible. When deciding who you should interview first it is best to start with who you think is least likely to be guilty and work toward the suspect who is most guilty. You do this because you try to gain information about the guilty party so you can try to get the truth out easier if you know what happened instead guessing and then the suspect knowing you are wrong.

When there is a case that involves a victim, the victim should always be interviewed first. The reason for this is because your questions are built from what happened and what the victim tells you happened to him or her. This helps the investigators put the case together and find the suspect.

There are many kinds of information that an investigator should always have available before conducting an interrogation on a suspect that they think is guilty. This information will be developed through investigative efforts; some will be obtained through a nonaccusatory interview that precedes the interrogation.

Information you need to know about the offense itself is the legal nature of offensive conduct (rape, robbery, burglary, or just theft). The date, time, and place of occurrence. A complete description of the crime area and the crime scene itself. The way the crime looks like it was committed, possible motives for the reason the crime was committed. You also need to know any incriminating factors regarding a particular suspect.

There is a lot of information you need to get from a suspect to help you do your job better. You need to get their personal background information. There present and past physical and mental conditions along with the past medical history. Their attitude towards the investigation, their relationship towards the victim or crime scene. You need to learn if there was any incriminating facts or possible motives. Learn if they have an alibi or other statements that were given to other investigators. Learn about their home environment, social attitudes, hobbies, sexual interests (only if directly relevant to the crime), and finally learn about abilities or opportunities to commit the offense.

The last piece of information that I am going to tell about is to make sure that the interrogation of suspects should always follow, and never go ahead of an investigation. The best guideline to follow is “investigate before you Interrogate.”

Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian. Criminal Interrogation and Confessions. 4th Ed. 2004.
Google Images: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_lxeuPtVnWsw/SAPMjmDrjEI/AAAAAAAAAms/jwZRfuR2_8w/s320/Investigate-books.jpg

Case Solutions Possibilities 3

By:Brianna, Skyler, Tony, Dalton, and Mark

As case information is being given, the investigator should begin thinking about possible solutions. They should raise many important preliminary questions, such as possible method used to commit the crime, the probable suspect or suspects, the possibility of a false report of person or persons who burglarized a place of business.

For instance, if a store manager has reported the theft of money from a safe, the following possibilities could be considered:
~Was there evidence of a forcible entry into the premises?
~Had the safe been locked?
~Who knew or might have known the safe’s combination, and who had access to it?
~Was the combination to the safe written down where other employees may have seen it?
~Is there any reason why the manager or owner might have taken the money?
~Might the owner of the store have a motivation for a false report, such as dwindling income or business losses, that would be alleviated by insurance coverage?
~Was the store locked for the night?
~Could some customer or outsider have concealed themselves in the store after hours?
~Is it possible that an employee set up the burglary and helped thieves steal the money?
~Is it possible that an insider stole the money and lied about locking it in the safe?
~Was the money accidentally left out of the safe?
~Could the amount stolen be exaggerated to cover insurance deductibles?

Evaluating Possible Motives

Consider each crime from several possible motives. The nature of some crimes may reveal an apparent motive. The following are indications of possible need-motivated thefts:
~stealing less than everything available
~bold thefts
~one-person thefts
~witnesses who describe the robber as extremely nervous and hesitant

The following are indications of possible greed-motivated thefts:
~stealing everything in sight
~carefully planned and executed thefts
~thefts involving multiple participants
~controlled and confident demeanor on the part of the robber
~con games and manipulation of the victim

Power-motivated crimes encompass sex crimes, most physical assaults, some arsons and property damage crimes, as well as many homicides. During a passive power crime the suspect will typically verbally manipulate the victim through threats or promises. There is generally no significant physical injury to the victim. Other related factors include:
~the offender almost always acts alone, although loved ones may suspect his criminal behavior.
~the victim is carefully selected for vulnerability.
~the victim is intoxicated or intimidated because of the offender’s age or size.
~the offender often experienced early emotional pain.
~the offender may have identity insecurity.
~the perpetrator may hold a respected position of power over the victim.

Characteristics of aggressive power crimes include:
~when the victim is random.
~victims are selected opportunistically.
~rapes involve unusual or unnatural sex acts.
~victim is humiliated and forced to perform unnecessary acts to degrade or debase.
~the perpetrator experienced early traumatic experiences of physical pain.
~the perpetrator has a strict and oftentimes religious background.

Evaluating Characteristics of the Crime

Identify characteristics of the crime or the offender to help focus the investigation around particular suspects. Do not overlook the person who initially discovered or reported a crime as a suspect. In theft cases where the reported loss is covered by insurance, consideration must be given to the possibility of a fraudulent claim. Always consider the possibility of complicity involving inside knowledge, preparation, or planning. When all probable suspects with access have been eliminated, consider people with unusual access.

When an internal theft is readily apparent, and there is no effort to cover it up or disguise the theft, unusual access should be suspected. In cases involving a human victim consider the possibility of an exaggerated claim. A truthful victim’s account will follow the guidelines of adhering to “normal human behavior” both for the victim and the assailant. Do not allow a single piece of circumstantial evidence to focus the entire investigation around one suspect to the exclusion of other possibilities. Do not discount any information developed during an investigation; what might appear initially as irrelevant information may provide a valuable lead.

Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian. Criminal Interrogation and Confessions, 4th ed. 2004.
google images

Case Solution Possibilities 3

Chapter 3
By: Jake Cox, Lindsay Frahm, Bryce Marble, Brittany Ellegood, Johnny Unruh, and Geoff Rohr

Investigators when looking into case information should raise many important preliminary questions to find possible suspect(s).

Ex. Store manager reports money stolen, things to consider: was there evidence of a forceable entry into the premises? Had the safe been locked? Was the store locked for the night?

Evaluating possible motives: Motives traditionally fall into three broad categories need, greed, and power. Need and greed motives are mainly with theft crimes. They either commit the crime due to financial need, or took advantage of, or created an opportunity to steal to advance his or her financial worth. (Greed)

Possible need motivated thefts: Stealing less than everything available. (Ex. stealing $500 from drawer containing $2000) One person Thefts, Witnesses describes robber as hesitant and nervous.

Greed motivated thefts: Stealing everything in sight, thefts involved multiple participants, and con games and manipulation to the victim.

Power motivated Crimes encompass sex crimes, most physical assaults, homicides, and some arson and property damage crimes. They can also be divided into passive or aggressive power crimes. During a passive power crime the offender will typically verbally manipulate the victim through threats or promises.

Other related factors: The victim is intoxicated or intimidated because of the offender’s age or size, the victim is carefully selected for vulnerability.

Aggressive power crime the victim will be unnecessarily brutalized, sometimes to the point of causing death. Offender’s reports experiencing an emotional “thrill” or “kick” from committing the crime.

Characteristics of the crime would include: When the victim is random, offenders are more likely to act in groups or have group affiliation. Victims are selected opportunistically. Rapes involve unusual or unnatural sex acts.

Do not overlook the person who initially discovered or reported the crime as a suspect. For a number of reasons the person who commits a crime may also be the one to report it. In one circumstance, a suspect who may be on the verge of ebing caught in a criminal act might explain to the other person that he just witnessed the crime or came upon the crime scene. In another circumstance, the guilty person will report the crime out of necessity.

Conclusion: Some crimes are readily solved through lucky breaks, presence of irrefutable psyical evidence linking the guilt suspect to the crime, or a guilt-stricken suspect who presents himself to the police to offer a full confession.

Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian. Criminal Interrogation and Confessions. 4th Ed. 2004.
Google Images: http://investigation.discovery.com/tv/real-interrogations/images/top-spot-250x200.jpg

Initial Precautionary Measure for the Protection of the Innocent 4

Chapter 4
By: Jake Cox, Lindsay Frahm, Bryce Marble, Brittany Ellegood, Johnny Unruh, and Geoff Rohr

An investigation is conducted to follow close guidelines and follow an objective manor with the respect to a proper interview and interrogation techniques.

Eyewitness Id and Motivations for false accusations: in eyewitness id cases, investigators should remember that there is a high degree of fallibility regarding such identifications, even in cases involving multiple identifiers.

Criminal Investigators are the following danger signals: Identifying the witness initially had stated he or she would be unable to identify the perpetrator. Other witnesses to the crime had failed to identify the suspect. The crime had been committed by a number of persons.

In cases of sexual abuse, if a child can identify the person suspected of being the abuser, and can relate an account of the event itself, his or her eyewitness identification is rarely invalid.

Intent issues: In Some investigations, a suspect will readily acknowledge being responsible for an action but deny wrongful intent. Examples of these cases include the suspect who admits “accidentally” starts a fire, or commits a homicide but didn’t know there were bullets in the gun. The following suggestions are offered when conducting an investigation concerning the issues of intent. 1) Evaluate the suspect’s explanation. 2) Focus the interview on behaviors rather than intentions.

Circumstantial evidence: Evidence can be taken in an article of clothing, or form of personal property.

Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian. Criminal Interrogation and Confession. 4th ed. 2004.
Google Images: http://www.theyrejustmyfriends.com/images/interrogation.jpg--

Chapter 4:

Initial Precautionary Measures for the Protection of the Innocent

By: Tony, Dalton, Brianna, Skyler, Mark

This chapter details preliminary steps to be taken to ensure the safety of the innocent and further stresses the need for objective, thorough, and precise techniques for conducting investigations (especially interrogations). If any bias is to exist, it should require a greater burden of proof to prove that a suspect is lying. Without the use of proper technique, an entire investigation can be compromised; possibly resulting in an acquittal or a wrongful conviction.

Of the many factors that can lead to a false conviction, there is none as prevalent as eyewitness error. Eyewitness identification, even when corroborated by multiple witnesses, is still highly fallible. Investigators should also keep in mind the potential for ulterior motivations within a witness that could lead to a false accusation. Fortunately, there are guidelines to help investigators determine the presence of such motives, such as: if a serious discrepancy exists between the initial identification and the actual appearance of the suspect, if the witness had identified someone else before identifying the present suspect, or if a considerable amount of time has elapsed between the time of the witness’s view of the offender and the identification of the suspect.

There are many other plausible explanations for false accusations. Repressed or false memories, various forms of intent, and circumstantial evidence can all lead to false accusations. Repressed memories add a level of complexity to the investigative process and require unparalleled attention to detail on the part of the investigator. Most psychiatric health professionals view repressed memories as evidence of severe trauma. However, some erroneously jump to the conclusion that the mere absence of memory is evidence of trauma. According to this reasoning, the fact that a victim has no recollection of a particular event is conclusive evidence that the crime occurred. Clearly, this extreme way of thinking can lead to more serious problems.

Unfortunately, there is no reliable way to determine if a repressed memory is fabricated (possibly by suggestions from the prosecuting attorney or other party). Nor is there a fail-proof method to help a victim fully uncover a repressed memory. The best course of action for an investigator is very precise questioning.

Another conundrum facing law enforcement officials is the issue of intent. Many times, a suspect may acknowledge performing an act that was against the law, but did so on accident, or for noble reasons (ex. self-defense or the defense of another). The motivation for a truly guilty individual to make this claim is obvious; however, there are instances where these claims are legitimate. Often times, the best course of action for an investigator is to examine the scene of the crime for evidence that either refutes or substantiates the suspect’s claims. Eye-witness testimony (if available) may also prove to be uniquely useful in ascertaining the truth in such situations. If neither of these two options are viable, the investigator should consult the suspect at a later time and compare his or her testimony to the original statement. Any major discrepancies should be noted with healthy skepticism.

Skepticism should also be applied when dealing with circumstantial evidence. Keeping in mind that all suspects are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, the investigator should rely only on concrete information. Unfortunately, such information is often exceedingly difficult to come by. However, with recent innovations in forensic science, this task is made possible. Combined with laborious and meticulous police work, hard evidence can be uncovered. While circumstantial evidence can lead police to a suspect, it should not (ideally) lead to a conviction.

By review the previous procedures and applying the full strength of personal judgment, a prospective investigator can develop the skills necessary to be a successful advocate of the law. These measures ensure that every effort is taken to ensure that no innocent person is convicted of a crime and lends unparallel creditability to the American Criminal Justice System.

Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian. Criminal Interrogation and Confessions. 4th ed. 2004.
google images

Chapter 5

Privacy and the Interview Room

By:Tony, Brianna, Skyler, Dalton and Mark

The main psychological factor contributing to a successful interview or interrogation is privacy. Investigators seem to instinctively realize this in their own private or social affairs, but they generally overlook or ignore its importance during an interview or interrogation. In a social situation, an investigator may carefully avoid asking a personal friend or acquaintance to divulge a secret in the presence of other persons; he instead will seek a time and place when the matter can be discussed in private. Likewise, if an investigator is troubled by a personal problem, he will usual find it easier to confide in one other person.

Even a problem that concerns more than one other person is usually discussed with each of the persons on separate occasions. However, during an interview or interrogation where the same mental processes are in operation, and to an even greater degree by reason of the criminality of the disclosure, investigators general seem to lose sight of the fact that a suspect or witness is much more apt to reveal secrets in the privacy in a room occupied only by himself and the investigator rather than in the presence of an additional person or persons. There are three cases which illustrate this point of privacy.

The first case involved a man being questioned concerning the killing of his wife who had been shot not too far away. The husband’s story was that they got robbed and the wife was shot after calling for help. The husband was viewed with considerable skepticism, and was suspected of being the actual killer. After several hours of rigorous interrogation with multiple interrogators, they finally decided to try a one-on-one interrogation. Almost instantly, the husband confessed to killing his wife and where he hid the murder weapon.

The second case involved an investigation into the rape and murder of a young girl who had been employed as a hostess in a cafeteria. Her nude body was found the following morning after she was reported missing. The investigators began to ask the employees at the job where the girl worked. They gathered the 7 waitresses at once to interview them simultaneously. This is a bad idea because there is no sense of privacy. The girls gave simplistic answers when asked about the girl who was murdered and the buss boy who was last seen with her. Information obtained this way could be misleading because no one girl wants to take the initiative.

The third and final case we will discuss involves the Degnan murder case. He refused to confess due to the group of people listening to him. He said he would go through with the confession to escape the electric chair if the interview could be done under different circumstances. He did not feel comfortable without the sense of privacy.

One of the authors was assisting in the investigation of a $500,000 inventory shortage at a warehouse. As a loss-prevention, the department had recently installed a specific room for interviewing employees. The private room was custom built, containing an observation mirror and a recording device, and adapted to other recommended standards. Yet, none of the employees interviewed buy the loss-prevention investigators revealed any involvement in/or knowledge of the on-going thefts. Upon entering the room, it was apparent why the interviewers were so un-productive.

Taped to the wall directly in front of the person being interviewed was a 2x4 foot poster exclaiming, “We prosecute shoplifters.” Depicted in the poster was a person in handcuffs being escorted by two police officers. It must be remembered that the motivations for all deception is to avoid consequences for telling the truth; suspects lie to escape prosecution, being sent to prison, and having to face family with the disgrace of their behavior. If the person being investigated is constantly reminded of the punishment of the crime, they are less likely to confess any involvement in the crime.

The environment of the interrogation room must be a sort of comforting one to help the person being investigated feel more comfortable about confessing to the crime. There are a couple ways to set up an interrogation and/or interview room. Although some may differ, there are a couple main guide-lines in creating the perfect interview/interrogation room. One suggestion for setting up the interview room would be to give it a sense of privacy. The room should be quiet, with none of the usual police surroundings, and with no distractions within the suspects view. It should be isolated enough to where there is no outside noises, and in a location where people won’t walk in and disturb the interview/interrogation. There are many factors in creating the ideal environment for a successful interrogation/interview, and many different techniques in succeeding in the interrogation/interview.

Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian, //Criminal Interrogation and Confession, 4th ed. 2004.
google images

Brianna, Dalton, Skyler, Tony, and Mark

Qualifications, Attitude, and General Conduct of the Investigator 6

Every police department should have a highly qualified person to do interrogation. The individual should poses certain attributes like intelligents, they should be able to get along with others, patience, high index of suspicion, intense interest in interrogation, and the individual should know the legal aspects of the law.

Interviewer Qualification:
The interviewer should remain objective and non judgmental during the interview. A good interviewer should be concerned for the suspect and those involved and really enjoy talking with others. They should also feel comfortable in asking questions and are able to separate the suspect from the crime and is able to assert the truth from the suspect. However, a poor interviewer is normally just interested in the facts and the opposite of a good interviewer.

Initial Interview Procedures:
There are three approaches that will allow the interrogator to obtain sufficient information.
1. Interview the suspect upon assumption of they are guilty.
2. Interview the suspect upon assumption of they are innocent.
3. Assume a neutral position and reframe from making any statement or implications one way or another until the suspect has disclosed some information or indications pointing either to guilt or innocence.

Assumption of Guilt:
This approach has a lot of a surprise attitude to it allowing the truth to come out. This approach also allows the suspect to have a reaction because he is presumed guilty. If the suspect is guilty they are more likely to react nonverbally and will have physical reactions. Such reactions might include fidgeting with clothing and other surrounding objects. However this approach does have its disadvantages. Some of the disadvantages are if the suspect doesn’t admit to anything then he becomes alarmed during the interview. Also sometimes their isn’t enough evidence to point towards guilt. If you have an innocent person they are liable to feel confused and disturbed and will become locked up and won’t give out vital information.

Assumption of Innocence:
This approach allows the investigator to get more clues out of the suspect and the investigator will be able to pin point innocence easier. Also if the suspect is guilty this approach will allow the suspect to let down his guard and they might let their guiltiness show. However this approach does have its disadvantage to the interviewer in that their mind might be set on innocence and they will not be able to solve the crime.

Assumption of a Neutral position:
This approach is the best approach there is because it allows the investigator to influence their question during an interview and they are able to obtain the truth easier.

Investigator Demeanor During An Interview:
1. The investigator should dress in civilian clothes so that the suspect isn’t reminded of being in police custody and the consequences.
2. In order to properly set the stage for the interview, some one else should escort the suspect into the interview room.
3. During the interview the investigator should sit approximately five feet directly in front of the suspect.
4. The interviewer should not smoke in the suspects presence.
5. The interviewers questions should be asked in a conversational tone and always be no accusatory.
6. The interviewer should take a written note following each response the subject offers.
7. The interviewer should use language that conforms to that used and understood by the suspect.
8. When interviewing persons of low socioeconomic status, address them as “Mr., Mrs., or Miss” rather than by their first name.

Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian. Criminal Interrogation and Confessions. 4th ed. 2004.
Google. Images

Chapter 5
Statements for Victims
Exhibit concern and understanding toward sex crime victims.

Victims are incredibly touchy people because their psyche has been rocked by tragedy and the crime committed. They are generally very reluctant to reveal details of the offense which makes things difficult, and they also have issues relating precisely what the offender did and said. The way the investigator can ease the story out of the victim is by, in the introductory statement, coaxing them into seeing the investigator in the same light as a doctor or other trusted figure. That way they feel a little more comfortable relaying sensitive but detailed information. Also, in order to help with this, the investigator should be the first to use sexual terminology such as “penis” or “vagina.”

After this process has been done, the investigator should allow the adult victim to tell the story without interruption. Next, the investigator should delicately ask specific questions about the offense that were not clearly answered by the victim’s recantation of what happened. Even though sympathy can be displayed by the detective too much shouldn’t be, because if that occurs then leading and subjective questioning can take place. Leading and subjective questions can severely skew an investigation because the victim might tell the detective what he/she wants to hear. Along with that, the investigator should avoid nodding the head, because this displays that the victim’s statements are being taken at face value without being questioned. Plus, it makes it easier for them to lie if they are or need to.

Consider asking the victim, while being left alone, to write out the details of what the offender did and said.

Resorting to this technique can be helpful because it can lead investigators to ask more questions, and may give more leads. Also, the written account can be used to further establish truthfulness in the victim’s story. This can also be used if a victim has clammed up and refuses to talk because the recantation is too painful to verbalize in detail. Written accounts can also be logged and saved easier at the police station.

During the introductory statement to a child victim of a sex offense, the investigator should clearly identify himself and the purpose of the interview.

In this kind of situation the detective should exhibit a calm, patient, and casual manner, and it is usually advantageous to start the interview with simple questions like, what the child’s interests are, their daily activities, favorite places to go etc. Once rapport and trust has been built with the child, the detective should encourage the child to tell the story in his words. An important initial question to ask the child is, “who have you already talked about this with?” Once that question is answered they can interview that person(s), but more importantly tell the child that the detective needs to know the whole truth about what happened. The detective should treat this situation with great sensitivity and encourage the story to be told bit by bit so that the child will not become further traumatized. Also, when discussing what happened, it is helpful to have a doll or book with body parts present so the child can point to where they were touched instead of saying it.

Victims should be treated with sensitivity and care, but the detective should still get the whole story. They must not sympathize too much with the victim, and they must still remain non-objective so their opinion does not show.

Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian. Criminal Interrogation and Confessions. 4th Ed. 2004

googleimages.com

Interrogation and Interview

Matt, Dan
This wiki is over interrogation, what we will be covering is how to NOT interrogate, apprehend and plainly not to torture a person. We will also go over some of the proper ways to interrogate and apprehend a suspect. In the video that this wiki is over, you will see clips from a movie, the news and an experiment to try and prove a theory. The theory in question is if water boarding is to be considered torture. The first section will be over the act of interrogating, the second will be over apprehending and the final section will be over water boarding. We will mostly focus on the first section.

In the video, a radio host, mancow, wanted to see if water boarding is torture. After lasting about 5 seconds, he had to quit and says it was absolutely terrible. Water boarding is the act of tying a person down and pouring water down the breathing passages while the face is usually covered and their head is inclined downwards. It enacts the gag reflex immediately and causes extreme pain, lung damage, may cause brain damage due to oxygen deprivation and in extreme cases, death.

???

Interviewing Approaches For The Difficult Suspects

Interviewing the Nervous Subject:
General nervousness is normal during and interview but over nervousness is not.
If the subject is nervous the investigator can talk in a calm voice and be in a relaxed position. If the subject is nervous from the get go then the crime should be introduced causally and the crime shouldn’t be brought up at first just casual questions like “What was the last movie you saw?”

Interviewing The Angry Subject:
If the subject is angry during the interrogation the anger should be addressed. To alleviate the suspects anger the interviewer can place the anger by condemning an officer for the way he treated the suspect. The interviewer should also realize that anger normally points towards guilt.

Interviewing The Narcissistic Subject:
Narcissistic subjects will tend to act superior and condescending during the interview resulting them to try in rush the interview. Therefore the investigator should maintain control of his authority and be persistent.

Interrogator Qualifications:
The interrogator should be able to put aside all person feeling during an interview. The interrogator should be comfortable using persuasive tactics that may be considered morally offensive to other investigators. The interrogator must be confident and is able to detect innocence or guilty and stand behind truthful decisions. The interrogator must be a good listener and have skill in communication.

Investigator Conduct During an Interrogation:
These recommendations should be helpful to anyone conducting an interview.
1. In the early stages of an interrogation, sit approximately four feet directly in front of the suspect.
2. Remain seated and refrain from pacing about the room.
3. Avoid creating the impression that the investigator is seeking a confession or conviction.
4. Keep pencil and paper out of sight during the interrogation.
5. Don’t use realistic words, such as murder, rape, strangle, stab, or steal, except in certain situations.
6. Treat the suspect with decency and respect, regardless of the nature of the offense.
7. Do not handcuff or shackle the suspect during the interrogation.
8. Do not be armed.
9. Recognize that in everyone there is some good , however slight it may be.

Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian. Criminal Interrogation and Confessions. 4th Ed. 2004.)
google images-interrogation

Ch. 8

The way questions are phased during an interview can increase or decrease the value of the subjects response to a question. Some questions show anxiety of deception subject if they chose to lie or tell the truth. Social learning teaches to ask questions in a delicate sensitive manner with an underlying deception that the person is answering it truthfully or not. An open wuestion calls for a narrative response. Eliciting an alibi forces a guilty suspect to lie to the investigators questions. Open question – “how was your day at work.” The investigator should listen for similar detail throughout the account, out of sequence information, expressions of thoughts and emotions, varying lack of detail, the absence of thoughts or wmotions, phrases indicating a time gap, implilied action phrases. Claryifing questions are open-ended questions that can be divided into three questions, questions that seek an explanation of events, questions that develop information about the subjects feelings or thoughts.

~Rachel Montgomery
Indications of Truthfulness and Deception
Prior to deciding if someone is being deceitful or not, open questions are asked. After the initial open question is asked is when the investigator should pay careful attention for indications of truthfulness.

First off, a clear indicator of truthfulness is the fact that the person’s story has similar detail throughout the account. This means that a lot of factors are taken into account like: a person’s background, education, communication skills, and even the recency of the event. They say that some individuals will include much more detail than others, and if the account is factual then there should be similar detail throughout the recount…despite the amount of detail.
Another indicator of truthfulness is out of sequence information in the story. It is said that our memories are not stored in real time like a video camera. Instead, we have primary memories and secondary memories. Naturally, primary memories will spur secondary memories but these secondary memories will probably occur out of sequence within the account. The inclusion of the out of sequence information offers support for the statement that is being given from factual recall. Truthful subjects will include this information because it is factual.

A third indicator of truthfulness involves expressions of thoughts and emotions. This is HUGE! Just for the record, I am a little shocked they don’t have more on this subject…but I digress. Anyway, when a subject is involved in a traumatic experience it is suspicious if they don’t include appropriate thoughts or expressions. The reason behind this is because humans are creatures of behavior, and if they are closely linked to the situation, and innocent, then their psychological reactions should show and be appropriate. An example would be if an investigator asked Joe Shmoe if he liked having intercourse with a dead body. If his reaction is initially one of disgust then he is likely innocent of that crime. On the other hand, if he smirks or something out of the ordinary…chances are he is guilty of that offense.

Indicators of Deception

When interviewing or interrogating a suspect there are specific indicators of deception which are: varying levels of detail, perfect chronology within the account, absence of thoughts or emotions, phrases indicating a time gap, and using implied action phrases.

First off, varying levels of detail are pretty easy to spot. If the suspect, or person in question, gives a very detailed account of events prior to the main event but the main event doesn’t have the same detail then that is suspicious. Same goes for the other way around. If the subject offers explicit details about the main event but minimal info about the events before and after the main event then that is suspicious too.

Secondly, perfect chronology within the account is very suspicious, because in the section about truthfulness it is said that truthful subjects will tell things out of order. If everything is told in order, without going back and thinking about it, that is very suspicious to investigators. To me, it would sound rehearsed and just too well known. Another scenario that could be present is that the subject is spontaneously making it all up as he goes which is just wrong. It is said that a truthful account that has been retold many times may be chronological, but if it’s deceptive then it will show, because it will be relatively simple to see that the person is not operating on normal patterns of recall.

Thirdly, the absence of emotions or thoughts clearly indicates deception. The book claims that deceptive accounts frequently are focused entirely on behaviors. For example, they just focus on what happened, when it happened, how it happened, what was said etc. If the account is fabricated then behavior will occur in isolation from the normal process. Basically, emotional dejection that is not related with grief is very suspicious, because it usually indicates that they did it and are trying to decide how to react instead of just reacting.

Next comes the phrases that indicate a time gap. Key phrases to listen for during an interview or an investigation are phrases like, “The next thing I remember…,” “Before I knew it…,” and “Eventually…” There are countless examples and scenarios where these phrases are used. For example, someone could say, “I got out of my chair and went to the bathroom. I walked out of the bathroom and before I knew it I was on the ground with a gun pressed against my temple.” Something like this shows that info was omitted but may not indicate fabrication. The investigator has to take all the other variables into account.

Finally, the last indicator of deception is when a subject uses implied action phrases. It is said that deceptive subjects rely a lot on the investigator’s assumptions about what could have or probably happened. Basically, investigators shouldn’t assume anything, especially if the subject did not specifically state that something happened. Key phrases to listen for are, “I thought about…,” “He started to…,” “He began…,” and “I wanted to…” An example they used in the book revolved around a rape. A 16 year old girl claimed to have been raped in a bathroom stall at school. The problem with her testimony though was she used words like “he starts” which implies that he went to do something but never followed through. Her use of present tense verbs killed her story too. She later confessed that she never really was raped…she just needed an excuse for missing class.

Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian. Criminal Interrogation and Confessions. 4th Ed. 2004.

google.images.com

Behavior Symptom Analysis

Chapter 9
By: Lindsay Frahm, Jake Cox, Bryce Marble, Geoff Rohr, Johnny Unruh, and Brittany Ellegood

There is a kind of confession in your looks, which your modesties have not craft enough to color.
-From Hamlet by Shakespeare.

Physicians, psychiatrists, psychologists, and many other professionals have long recognized the value of evaluating a person’s behavior in order to arrive at a diagnosis. This attitude has been based upon the principle that there are several levels or channels, of communication, and that the true meaning of the spoken word is amplified or modified by the other channels, including speech hesitancy, body posture, hand gestures, facial expressions, and other body activities. In other words, a person can say one thing while his body movements, facial expressions or tone of voice may reveal something entirely different.

In general, research based on artificially motivation subjects to lie or tell the truth has not demonstrated significant accuracies for behavior-based assessments. It would appear that a suspect’s motivation to avoid real consequences of having deception detected, or failure to have their truthfulness revealed, plays an instrumental role in behavior analysis. In addition, laboratory-based studies do not utilize a structured interview approach, as was used in all the previously mentioned field research involving actual criminal suspects. The effectiveness of a structured, clinical approach to the interview process was apparent in the previously mentioned field study involving 53 college students. During their initial evaluation of the ten behavior analysis interviews, the student’s average accuracy was above chance levels.

To appreciate the role that observing behavior symptoms plays in detecting deception, it must be realized that there are three distinctly different channels in which we communicate:

1) Verbal channel – word choice and arrangement of words to send a message
2) Paralinguistic channel – characteristics of speech falling outside the spoken word
3) Nonverbal channel – posture, arm and leg movements, eye contact, and facial expressions

These channels can work together to send the same message or, conversely, to send conflicting messages. Behavior analysis involves the study of inferences made from these behavioral observations. There are a number of basic principles involved in behavior analysis. Each will be presented separately.

There are no unique behaviors associated with truthfulness or deception. The behavioral observations an investigator makes of a suspect do not specifically correlate to truth or deception. Rather, they reflect the subject’s internal emotional state experienced during a response. These emotions can range from anger, confidence, and certainty to fear, guilt, apprehension, and embarrassment. Clearly, some of these emotions are more closely associated with truthfulness (confidence, certainty, conviction) and others with deception (fear, guilt, apprehension, conflict). Behavior analysis, therefore, involves making inferences about a subject’s truthfulness based on behavioral observations, none of which are unique to truth telling or lying.

Evaluate all three channels of communication simultaneously. When the three channels each send the same message, the investigator can have high confidence in believing the subject’s verbal message. However, when inconsistencies exist between the channels, the investigator needs to evaluate possible causes for this inconsistency.

Evaluate paralinguistic and nonverbal behaviors in context with the subject’s verbal message. When assessing the probable meaning of a subject’s emotional state, the subject’s paralinguistic and nonverbal behaviors must always be considered in context with the verbal message.

Evaluate the preponderance of behaviors occurring throughout the interview.

Establish the subject’s normal behavioral patterns. Each person who is interviewed will have his own behavioral idiosyncrasies (for example, the way the person gestures, the way the person gestures, the style of speech, and the degree to which he establishes eye contact). Consequently, at the outset of each interview the investigator should spend several minutes discussing nonthreatening information (perhaps casual conversation or collecting biographical information) so as to establish a behavioral baseline for the particular subject. Then, as the interview progresses and the subject exhibits behavioral changes when the issue under investigation is discussed, these changes may take on added significance.

Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian. Criminal Interrogation and Confessions. 4th Ed. 2004.
Google Images: http://investigation.discovery.com/tv/real-interrogations/images/top-spot-250x200.jpg
[[/==]]

Interview and Interrogation By Becca and Jay
The three major aspects of criminal investigation are (1) to identify the criminal, (2) to locate and apprehend him (3) and to prove his guilt in the court. During the course of investigation an investigator depends on three major tools available to him which are instrumentation, information and, interview and interrogation. Instrumentation helps him to identify or eliminate a suspect by the use of scientific technology thereby analyzing the collected physical evidences whereas the information is transformed into intelligence to identify, locate and apprehend him. But the significance of interview and interrogation cannot be discarded as it plays major role in investigation whenever there is little or no physical evidence.

The difference between interview and interrogation is that an interview is conducted in a cordial atmosphere where a witness is more comfortable physically and psychologically. On the other hand, whenever a person is questioned in an uncomfortable atmosphere (interrogation room) where he is under the psychological pressure, it is an interrogation. Interrogator, in this case, has more psychological advantage than his suspect. Interrogation is a kind of psychological warfare between interrogator and suspect. Only when an interrogator overpowers a suspect psychologically, he gets a confession or the fact of a case which is not possible otherwise.

Interrogation is an art. You can master it through your study and experience. A good investigator is not necessarily a good interrogator. To be a good interrogator you need to be a good actor and must have an insight of human psychology. You should be able to act according to age, profession and intellect of the individual suspect because a suspect could be a lawyer, doctor, scientist, professor, manager or an unskilled laborer and, could be a child, teenager, adult and senior.

Interview of Witnesses

There are various kinds of witnesses such as indifference witness, interested witness, hostile witness and child witness. Indifference witness is the best kind of witness for a case because the witness does not have any interest in success or failure of the case. He will always prefer to tell whatever he knows about the case without lying, whereas the interested witness may be a friend, a relative or a potential beneficiary in the case and may exaggerate the fact. As for the hostile witness, he may have close relation or friendship with the suspect and do want to lie to protect the suspect. You may need to interrogate him rather than interview him. Child is a volatile witness who does not lie but is prone to the suggestions.

It is worth to have an eyewitness to support a case but you should also know that his education, technical knowledge, physical condition, profession and emotion influence his observation. Don't expect him to tell everything of what happened when the incident took place. He does not observe as what a police officer needs to observe. His information is valuable if it corroborates to the physical or circumstantial evidence collected. Reconstruction of a case is important to verify the truthfulness of the information of an eyewitness.

Detecting a lie

Polygraph and Computer Voice Stress Analyzer are being used to detect lies. While the Polygraph measures changes in person's body associated with stress of deception- alterations in heart rate, breathing, emoional sweating, the Computerized Voice Stress Analyzer measures changes in voice frequency in the human voice that occur whenever someone is lying. The use of both of these tools are helpful to an investigator to narrow down the area of investigation even though the results are not admissible in the court of law due to the probability of evading a deception.

Source: http://ncthakur.itgo.com/chand3a.htm

The Nine Steps of Interrogation
~Alicia Allen

Interviewing is meant to not accuse a person, to develop an investigative information. Interrogation is used with statements for the purpose of obtaining an admission of guilt.
The interrogation should be in conducted in a non supportive environment. This means the person should be put in a situation where they are away from their normal surroundings. The interrogation room should be quiet, private, and free of any distractions or noises. The chairs in the room should be facing each other about 4.5 to 5 ft apart.

1. Positive confrontation – This consists of an immediate accusation of the crime, mainly to get the suspects attention and to let them know that you know they committed the crime.

2. Theme development – psychological justification (not a legal justification but a moral justification)

3. Handling denials – avoid a person talking and saying “I didn’t do it”. The more times they say it the less likely you are to get a confession. Look for key phrases like – “can I say one thing” or “hold on one min”
*Interrogation of a truthful person will end here*

4. Overcoming objections

5. Procurement of attention – moving closer to the person to invade their personal space to regain and keep their attention

6. The passive mood – A lot of times, a guilty person will pass themselves off as not caring or being withdrawn from the situation completely.

7. Alternative question – An alternative question that gets the suspect to admit their guilt could be: “did you plan this out or was it spur of the moment?” “Did you do this thing yourself or did your buddy talk you into it?”

8. Oral confession – Once the subject accepts the alternative question, it is the first admission of guilt. Continue with short answered questions to further give us details of the crime.

9. Written confession – The written confession could be written by suspect, written by investigator and signed by suspect, tape recorded or video recorded. Either way, that oral confession needs to be documented into the written confession, and signed by the individual admitting his/her guilt.
Note: Steps and 7 are most important in the process in order to obtain a confession.

The Reid Nine Steps of Interrogation

by
Laura Williams

The Reid method of interrogation is a highly respected method of questioning suspects developed by John E. Reid and Associates.1 Though effective, it is a complex system. Because it is taught in police training programs througout the country, it was necessary for the authors to break it down into steps which could be more easily learned. The number of steps at which they ultimately arrived was nine. Not all nine steps will be included in every interrogation, but they serve to illustrate what can and often does happen as a suspect is questioned.

STEP 1: Direct, positive confrontation.
This is the very beginning, where the investigator presents the suspect with a statement that he is considered to be the person who committed the offense. It is important at this point for the investigator to observe both the verbal and non-verbal responses the confrontation causes from the suspect.
STEP 2: The Interrogation Theme
The investigator must now decide how to present a reason for the crime's commission that the suspect may see as “a way out”. Moral blame can be assigned to another person. Necessity for the crime can be theorized. Again, the investigator must carefully gauge the suspect's responses to the theme.
STEP 3: Handling initial denials of guilt.
Not surprisingly, both guilty and innocent suspects will initially express denial of guilt within the first two steps. It is important not to allow these to continue. Repeated denials of guilt are simply practice; they make it easier to continue doing so. The skilled investigator must rein in the suspect's denials and elaborations and return the interrogation to the them established in Step 2.
STEP 4: Overcoming the suspect's secondary line of defense.
Following the initial denial of guilt, the suspect will often try to “fill in the blanks”. They will present reasons why they would not have committed the offense. Often these excuses will span moral and financial, or even religious reasons why they should not be considered as the guilty party.
STEP 5: Tuning out.
When repeated denials of guilt and elaborate explanations fail to persuade an investigator of the suspect's innocence, they will often “tune out” to the investigator's theme. It is critical now that the interrogator procure the suspect's full attention. This may even require closing the physical distance between suspect and investigator. Then the suspect is returned to the theme established in Step 2.
STEP 6: Recognizing the suspect's passive mood.
Here again, it is critical for the skilled investigator to pay attention to what the suspect is doing, as well as saying. A slumped posture may indicate defeat. Eyes drawn to the floor may show a weakening in the story. The investigator must accurately gauge these signals to determine how next to proceed.
STEP 7; The alternative question.
A theme has been established, and the suspect has been given the opportunity to develop that theme with the investigator. Now, the investigator presents a choice regarding some aspect of the crime. One is presented as more “acceptable” than the other. Whichever choice is made is effectively an admission of culpability.
STEP 8: Oral confession.
This is the step where culpability has been established, and the interrogator now proceeds to elicit details. These can include the location of evidence, explanations of motive, and any other details that can legally establish guilt.
STEP 9: Getting it in writing.

Chapter 13: Reid Nine Steps of Interrogation 13

By: Autumn Preston, Becca Howard, Bronson Scott, Derik Stithem Tonya Rudizk

On the basis of these considerations, criminal offenders are subject to a rather broad, yet flexible classification as either emotional or nonemotional offenders. Emotional offender refers to an offender who would predictably experience a considerable feeling of remorse, mental anguish, or compunction as a result of his offense. An emotional offender individual has a heavy sense of moral guilt and can be identified behaviorally during an interrogation. During the interrogation and as it process into further steps the individual eyes will water and their posture will become less rigid.

They will begin to lose eye contact with the investigator and just stare at the floor. The most effective interrogation tactics and techniques to use on such a suspect are those based primary upon a sympathetic approach. Nonemotional offender refers to a person who ordinarily does not experience a troubled conscience as a result of committing a crime. The suspect is content to let the investigator talk, but the words fall on seemingly deaf ears and the suspect will maintain a defensive, closed posture, which includes crossed arms, erect head, and a cold, hard stare. The most effective tactic and techniques to use are based primarily upon a factual analysis approach. The main goal of an investigator is to get the suspect to state the truth.

In utilizing the nine-step approach to an effective interrogation, the investigator should keep in mind two points:
• The numerical sequence does not signify that every interrogation will encompass all nine steps of that those that are used must conform to a specific sequence.
• Investigator should be on the alert to evaluate whatever behavior responses the suspect may be displaying; responses themselves may be suggestive of the next appropriate step, and in some instances may reveal the suspect’s actual innocence.

The process of steps in interrogation has been formed into the nine steps of the criminal interrogation:

1. Direct, Positive Confrontation
2. Theme Development
3. Handling Denials
4. Overcoming Objections
5. Procurement and Retention of a Suspect’s Attention
6. Handling the Suspect's Denials
7. Presenting and Alternative Question
8. Having the Suspect Orally Relate Various Details of the Offense
9. Converting and Oral Confession into a Written Confession

Miranda warnings must be read to a suspect and the wavier must be obtained before allowed to proceed to the nine steps. The investigator should have an evidence case folder and have prepared before entering the interview room. Also the investigator could consider visual items, such as videos, fingerprint cards, and an evidence bag.

Direct, Positive Confrontation the suspect is evaluating the level of the investigator’s confidence in his guilt. If the suspect perceives that the investigator is not certain of his guilt, he is unlikely to confess. Theme Development involves in large measure, presenting a “moral excuse” for the suspect’s commission of the offense or minimizing the moral implications of the conduct. Handling denials is to prevent the suspect from engaging in unnecessary denials that distract from the investigator’s theme and subsequent efforts to persuade the suspect to tell the truth. Overcoming Objections involves turning the objection around to use it as a reason why they suspect should tell the truth.

Procurement and retention of a suspect’s attention is to psychologically withdraw from the interrogation and ignore the investigator’s theme. Handling the suspects orally relate the investigator should begin to concentrate on the central core of the selected theme. Presenting the Alternative question gives the suspect the opportunity to start telling the truth by making a single admission. Having the suspect orally relate various details of the offense the investigator must have patience with the suspect, allowing them to relate details to their crime at their pace. Converting and oral confession into a written confession involves the procedures and legal considerations of converting the oral confession into a written one.

Theme development can be categorized into seven themes:
1. Sympathize with the suspect by saying that anyone else under similar conditions or circumstances might have done the same thing.
2. Reduce the suspect’s feeling of guilt by minimizing the moral seriousness of the offense.
3. Suggest a less revolting and more morally acceptable motivation or reason for the offense than that which is known or presumed.
4. Sympathize with the suspect by condemning others,
a. Condemn the victim
b. Condemn the accomplice
5. Appeal to suspect’s pride by well-selected flattery
6. Point of possibility of exaggeration on part of accuser or victim, or exaggerate nature and seriousness of the event itself.
7. Point out to the suspect grave consequences and futility of continuation of criminal behavior.

In conclusion the importance of privacy during an interrogation is a key factor. It’s easy to always follow steps and get somewhere but that is not actually true during an interview. You can follow those steps that will lead you to more information but its going to take time and patience to find your guilty suspect.

Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian. Criminal Interrogation and Confessions. 4th Ed. 2004.

Chapter 14: Recommendations for Interrogators

By: Autumn Preston, Becca Howard, Bronson Scott, Derik Stithem Tonya Rudizk

This chapter talks mostly about how an investigator should exercise patience and persistence, as well as how one should never lose sight of the fact that when a criminal offender is asked to confess a crime, a great deal is being requested. Also, they need to remember that a confession may cause the suspect his or hers’ loss of freedom, liberty, or even their life. The chapter also gives example on how an interrogator tries to pry the truth out of a suspect.

Patience and persistence are key factors for an interrogators, namely because if a suspect senses that an investigator becomes impatient, the suspect then is encouraged to carry on with his deception or lie, which hopefully will make the investigator give up sooner. If the investigator is smart and uses his head while practicing patience and persistence, then he will not become angry and physically forceful, this would be unprofessional and endanger the welfare and security of the innocent or eliciting from the guilty a confession that is legally valueless as evidence. As the saying goes, “patience is a virtue,” and investigators must have a great amount of patience, namely they have to show that they have all the time in the world and that nothing else matters to them other than getting the facts and more importantly the truth.

Investigators mustn’t give up or show fatigue while interviewing a suspect. If the suspect sees an opening or “the light at the end of a dark tunnel,” so to speak, he will continue with his façade and the investigator will give in and call it quits allowing the suspect to walk. An interrogator must never conclude at a time when he feels discouraged and ready to give up; he needs to continue for a little while longer. The reason is because the authors of this book noticed that in many instances in which the suspect confessed, or later said he had decided to confess, just at the very time when the investigator was ready to abandon, or did abandon, his efforts.

Though when an investigator feels like he has used up every last possible technique and still isn’t getting anywhere, many times the investigator will leave the suspect alone in the interview room for awhile after telling the suspect to think it over, or that his life is to important to throw away by “playing this game,” to allow everything to sink in and hopefully allow the suspect to feel guilty and try and figure a way to keep out of being in trouble. Upon returning the investigator will see if the suspect will tell the truth. If the suspect is willing to tell the truth, he may make an inquiry as to what will happen to him if he confesses or if he’ll go to jail or not, the investigator should not make any promises as to what will happen to the suspect.

Under no circumstances should the investigator suggest any possibility of reduced consequences if the suspect confesses, nor should he hold out any inducement whatsoever. Any such reply could nullify the legal validity of the confession that may threat of inevitable consequences, may induce an innocent person to confess. In addition to the previous, ways to get a suspect to confess, the investigator should stick to the following general guidelines when questioning: encourage a narrative version of the witnesses’ story and follow up with a specific question for clarification, ease the suspect if he is reluctant or aggravated, offer him support and encouragement, be interested in the witness, be patient, be careful to distinguish fact from inference, be aware of the verbal and nonverbal behavior symptoms that the suspect displays.

This chapter only discusses a few of the techniques that an investigator may use while questioning a suspect. During the questioning the investigator needs to be patience and be willing to help the suspect.

Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian. Criminal Interrogation and Confessions. 4th Ed. 2004.

Chapter 15: Distinguishing between True and False Confessions

By: Autumn Preston, Becca Howard, Bronson Scott, Derik Stithem, Tonya Rudzik

The impact of a confession on a jury in a capital case is so powerful that a defense attorney who does not attempt to suppress it risks charges of providing inadequate counsel. While there are legal safeguards afforded a defendant at trial to refute the voluntariness or trustworthiness of a professed confession, a false confession should be recognized long before it is entered into evidence against an innocent defendant. Ultimately the responsibility of determining whether a confession is true or false falls upon the investigator who obtained it.

CATEGORIES OF FALSE CONFESSIONS
Coerced Compliant Confessions

An allegation of a coerced compliant confession occurs when the suspects claims that he confessed to achieve and instrumental gain. Such gains include being allowed to go home, bringing a lengthy interrogation to and end, or avoiding physical injury.

An example of a coerced compliant confession was related by a gang member who was interviewed by one of the authors of this book. The member explained that at age 14, while under the influence of drugs, he shot his best friend in the head. During his interrogation he maintained his innocence until the detective beat him with a phone book. After enduring this for a period of time, he “gave up” and led the detectives where he had hidden the gun.

Voluntary False Confessions

Criminal offenders, whose guilt is unknown to the police, will rarely surrender themselves and confess their guilt. The instinct for self-preservation stands in the way. An investigator should view with considerable skepticism any “conscience-stricken” confession. Especially following well-publicized and heinous crimes, it is common for individuals who had nothing whatsoever to do with the crime to come forward and confess. A. Bedau and M. Radelet reported that 34 percent of false confessions fall within this category.

Coerced Internalized Confessions

Coerced internalized confessions are confessions that are allegedly false and occur when the investigator successfully convinces an innocent suspect the he is guilty of a crime he does not remember committing. This condition has been referred to in the literature as the “memory distrust syndrome” or “faulty memory syndrome” and, according to Bedau and Radelet, accounts for 21 percent of false confessions.

The Nonexistent Confession

This is a statement made by a suspect in which there is no acceptance of responsibility for committing the offense. While the statement may contain information that is incriminating (such as a false alibi, acknowledgment of opportunity of access, or unreasonable explanation for being in possession of incriminating evidence0, there is no statement, involuntary or otherwise, where the suspect acknowledges committing a crime.

CONFESSION VOLUNTARY
Coercion

As previously noted, no confession following interrogation is completely voluntary in the psychological sense of the word. When applying a legal characterization of voluntariness, a common concept is, “overbearing the suspect’s free will.” At what point an investigator’s words, demeanor or actions are so intense or powerful as to overcome the suspect’s will cannot be universally defined. Each suspect must be considered individually, and consideration must be given with respect to such factors as his previous experience with police, his intelligence, mental stability, and age.

Permissible Incentives for a Confession

The purpose for interrogation is to persuade a suspect whom the investigator believes to be lying about involvement in a crime to tell the truth. The only way this can be accomplished is by allowing the suspect to believe that he will benefit in some way by telling the truth. Ordinary people do not act against self-interest with out at least a temporary perception of a positive gain in doing so. There are a number of possible benefits for telling the truth that an investigator can offer a suspect during an interrogation that, in no way, address the real consequences that suspect faces and, therefore, would not be apt to cause an innocent person to confess. These include:
• The suspect will experience internal relief by reducing guilt feelings associated with committing the crime.
• The suspect will be respected by loved ones for having courage to face the truth.
• By telling the truth the suspect will learn from his mistake and not commit worse crimes in the future.

CONFESSION TRUSTWORTHINESS

Whether a confession is voluntary is a separate and distinct legal test from whether it is trustworthy; and involuntary confession may be true or false. However, for a confession to be considered trustworthy the admission of criminal involvement must be factual.

Voluntary Confessions

The trustworthiness of voluntary confessions that occur independent of any police questioning should be viewed with skepticism. A genuine conscience- stricken confessor will give the appearance of a person who has been broken in health and spirit as a result of a troubled conscience, depending on the crime for which he is confessing. Perhaps with the exception of the mentally ill person, the false confessor is apt to be rather untroubled in appearance and conduct. He readily acknowledges all elements of the crime and fully accepts the pending consequences for the crime−in short, he lacks the emotional turmoil and expressions of remorse associated with the true confessor who comes forward voluntary.

Chapter 16: TESTIMONY PREPERATION

By: Autumn Preston, Becca Howard, Bronson Scott, Derik Stithem Tonya Rudizk

Everything is based on the Miranda Law. If it is not used correctly then everything could go horribly wrong and the suspect could get off.
• With respect to an interrogation, the investigator’s notes should reflect the following.
• Were Miranda rights given? If so, when and by whom?
• If Miranda rights were not given, was the suspect advised that he was not under arrest and free to leave?
• When did the interview begin and end?
• When did the interrogation begin and end?
• Were the suspect’s biological needs satisfied? Sleep? Food? Medication? Bathroom?
• What was the suspect’s psychological state at the outset of the interrogation?
• What was the principal theme used?
• What alternative question did the suspect ultimately confess to?
• What time did active persuasion stop?
• What was the suspect’s demeanor during his confession?
• Who witnessed the confession?

The defense attorneys’ will rely extensively on two documents for cross-examination purposes: written confession and police reports. With respect to police reports, minor inconsistencies between two investigators’ reports as to when Miranda rights were administered, who was present during the interrogation, or related sequences of events may introduced in court as evidence of a major conspiracy or gross incompetence.

• Next come the COURT’S VIEW OF THE WITNESS
• Despite a wide range of backgrounds and experiences, or perhaps because of that, juries tend to be pretty good at ferreting out issues and evaluation evidence. It is clearly a mistake to treat the jury like a group of lay people who cannot possibly understand the difficulties investigators face because “they have never been there.” During a trial, before any deliberation begins, the juror’s primary goal is to understand a witness’s testimony and assess that person’s credibility.
• THE PERCEPTION OF THE WITNESS AS AN ADVERSARY
• Duties of an investigator are more closely associated with the prosecution than the defense. When in court an investigator should not allow himself to be perceived as an agent of the prosecution. This could evident to the jury if the police witness sounds anxious to prove the prosecution’s case and the witness will lose credibility and be perceived as biased and perhaps even dishonest. The prosecution and defense involve themselves in a tug of war with every witness and the witness is in the middle. The prosecutor is much more interested in securing a conviction than worrying about an investigator’s reputation. They don’t even worry about further employment with the department. Witnesses can attest, loyalties are left outside the courtroom door. The prosecutor cannot perceive a weakness in his case or he won’t be able to set up his own witness to cover that weakness. The only concern of the investigator should have while testifying is whether or not the judge or jury fully understands the issues presented by the attorneys. It is a way of the investigator to separate himself from the prosecution.
• WITNESS DEMEANOR ON THE STAND
• A witness’s attire is the first element that the jury evaluates. A witness who dresses like they don’t care about his job or role in the criminal justice system regardless of the truthfulness of his testimony. A witness who is involved in undercover work and appears unshaven should immediately let the jury know that his present appearance is not typical. Most attorneys do not wear $500 suits to court and don’t dress their defendants in similar clothing. However you say it juries associate hygiene to care and attire integrity and truthfulness. It matters a lot on how an attorney dresses so the jury will think they care about their job and are trying to do it to their best ability.
• Attitude makes all the difference also. A witness should have a good attitude He should come across polite and not as a “know it all” arrogant jerk. He should also try not to be argumentative.
• Nonverbal behaviors generally occur on the preconscious level to the extent that often our mind is so focused on other matters that we are not aware of the messages we send nonverbally. If a witness swears in court and gets aggressive then the jury will think they are guilty, because they are to defensive.
• A witness must also have good posture. And they must not constantly be jittering or playing with their hands or feet. This shows that they are nervous and a jury would pick up on it.
• Questions a Lawyer might ask in court would be such as the following.
• How long was it you questioned my client.
• Why was it you questioned him when you knew he had been awake for so many hours.
• Did you force then to confess by making it so they would be able to sleep, eat, go to the bathroom, ect.
• Is it true the defendant would have said anything just to end the questioning?
• Did you scare my client into confession?

Inbau, Fred. Reid, John. Buckley, Joseph. Jayne, Brian. Criminal Interrogation and Confessions. 4th Ed. 20

Common Interrogation Techniques

By Samantha and Veronica

Modern interrogation is a study in human nature. Most of us are more likely to talk to people who appear to be like us. Once we start talking, it's hard for us to stop. Once we start telling the truth, it's harder to start lying. When a police officer tells us our fingerprints were found on the inside doorknob of a home that was robbed two days ago, we get nervous, even if we wore gloves the whole time we were inside.

The psychological manipulation begins before the interrogator even opens his mouth. The physical layout of an interrogation room is designed to maximize a suspect's discomfort and sense of powerlessness from the moment he steps inside. The classic interrogation manual "Criminal Interrogation and Confessions" recommends a small, soundproof room with only three chairs (two for detectives, one for the suspect) and a desk, with nothing on the walls. This creates a sense of exposure, unfamiliarity and isolation, heightening the suspect's "get me out of here" sensation throughout the interrogation.

Before the nine steps of the Reid interrogation begin, there's an initial interview to determine guilt or innocence. During this time, the interrogator attempts to develop a rapport with the suspect, using casual conversation to create a non-threatening atmosphere. People tend to like and trust people who are like them, so the detective may claim to share some of the suspect's interests or beliefs. If the suspect starts talking to the interrogator about harmless things, it becomes harder to stop talking (or start lying) later when the discussion turns to the crime.

1.) Confrontation
The detective presents the facts of the case and informs the suspect of the evidence against him. This evidence might be real, or it might be made up. The detective typically states in a confident manner that the suspect is involved in the crime. The suspect's stress level starts increasing, and the interrogator may move around the room and invade the suspect's personal space to increase the discomfort.

2.) Theme development
The interrogator creates a story about why the suspect committed the crime. Theme development is about looking through the eyes of the suspect to figure out why he did it, why he'd like to think he did it and what type of excuse might make him admit he did it. Does the suspect use any particular mode of reasoning more often than others? For example, does he seem willing to blame the victim? The detective lays out a theme, a story, that the suspect can latch on to in order to either excuse or justify his part in the crime, and the detective then observes the suspect to see if he likes the theme. Is he paying closer attention than before? Nodding his head? If so, the detective will continue to develop that theme; if not, he'll pick a new theme and start over. Theme development is in the background throughout the interrogation. When developing themes, the interrogator speaks in a soft, soothing voice to appear non-threatening and to lull the suspect into a false sense of security.

3.) Stopping denials
Letting the suspect deny his guilt will increase his confidence, so the detective tries to interrupt all denials, sometimes telling the suspect it'll be his turn to talk in a moment, but right now, he needs to listen. From the start of the interrogation, the detective watches for denials and stops the suspect before he can voice them. In addition to keeping the suspect's confidence low, stopping denials also helps quiet the suspect so he doesn't have a chance to ask for a lawyer. If there are no denials during theme development, the detective takes this as a positive indicator of guilt. If initial attempts at denial slow down or stop during theme development, the interrogator knows he has found a good theme and that the suspect is getting closer to confessing.

4.) Overcoming objections
Once the interrogator has fully developed a theme that the suspect can relate to, the suspect may offer logic-based objections as opposed to simple denials, like "I could never rape somebody — my sister was raped and I saw how much pain it caused. I would never do that to someone." The detective handles these differently than he does denials, because these objections can give him information to turn around and use against the suspect. The interrogator might say something like, "See, that's good, you're telling me you would never plan this, that it was out of your control. You care about women like your sister — it was just a one-time mistake, not a recurring thing." If the detective does his job right, an objection ends up looking more like an admission of guilt.

5.) Getting the suspect's attention
At this point, the suspect should be frustrated and unsure of himself. He may be looking for someone to help him escape the situation. The interrogator tries to capitalize on that insecurity by pretending to be the suspect's ally. He'll try to appear even more sincere in his continued theme development, and he may get physically closer to the suspect to make it harder for the suspect to detach from the situation. The interrogator may offer physical gestures of camaraderie and concern, such as touching the suspect's shoulder or patting his back.

6.) The suspect loses resolve
If the suspect's body language indicates surrender — his head in his hands, his elbows on his knees, his shoulders hunched — the interrogator seizes the opportunity to start leading the suspect into confession. He'll start transitioning from theme development to motive alternatives (see the next step) that force the suspect to choose a reason why he committed the crime. At this stage, the interrogator makes every effort to establish eye contact with the suspect to increase the suspect's stress level and desire to escape. If, at this point, the suspect cries, the detective takes this as a positive indicator of guilt.

7.) Alternatives
The interrogator offers two contrasting motives for some aspect of the crime, sometimes beginning with a minor aspect so it's less threatening to the suspect. One alternative is socially acceptable ("It was a crime of passion"), and the other is morally repugnant ("You killed her for the money"). The detective builds up the contrast between the two alternatives until the suspect gives an indicator of choosing one, like a nod of the head or increased signs of surrender. Then, the detective speeds things up.

8.) Bringing the suspect into the conversation
Once the suspect chooses an alternative, the confession has begun. The interrogator encourages the suspect to talk about the crime and arranges for at least two people to witness the confession. One may be the second detective in room, and another may be brought in for the purpose of forcing the suspect to confess to a new detective — having to confess to a new person increases the suspect's stress level and his desire to just sign a statement and get out of there. Bringing a new person into the room also forces the suspect to reassert his socially acceptable reason for the crime, reinforcing the idea that the confession is a done deal.

9.) The confession
The final stage of an interrogation is all about getting the confession admitted at trial. The interrogator will have the suspect write out his confession or state it on videotape. The suspect is usually willing to do anything at this point to escape the interrogation. The suspect confirms that his confession is voluntary, not coerced, and signs the statement in front of witnesses.

Ch 17
Dalton Simon
[[==]]
Legally speaking, a person is guilty only after a judge or jury has made a determination of that fact. They start from the premise of a presumption of innocence and guilt can only be established by proof beyond reasonable doubt that obviously is not the prerogative of an investigator. Consequently, the words guilt and innocence are used here to signify nothing more than the investigator's opinion. This simply means that it is the investigator belief that the suspect either committed the crime in question or he did not. The usage carries no legal implication whatsoever.

Formal interview is conducted in a controlled environment, ideally one that is non supportive to the person being interviewed, such as a police station, security office, or a neutral location. During a formal interview the investigator has many luxuries among the most important is that the interview can be structured to allow for the gathering of the most meaningful information. In addition, under this circumstance it becomes possible to conduct an accusatory interrogation immediately following the interview. That procedures outlined here primarily relate to the formal interview.

Before a custodial suspect may be interviewed even for the limited purpose of making a tentative determination of his whereabouts at the time of a crime, or other constitutional rights that were mandated in the United States Supreme Court's. After the issuance of the warnings, no interview or interrogation of a person inn police custody may be conducted unless he has waived the prescribed rights to remain silent and to have a lawyer present. So these interview techniques can only be used when 1) the suspect is not in custody or 2) the suspect is in custody and has waived both the right to remain silent and the right to a lawyer.

Many of the initial contacts that a police or security officer has with suspects, witnesses, or victims will occur informally. While privacy should always be a primary concern, an informal environment rarely circumstances should only be considered when the person being questioned evidences clear signs of wanting to confess or where the timing and evidence suggest that a confession is likely. For example, a police officer responds to a call from a store owner reporting that a customer shoplifted merchandise. Under this circumstance it would be appropriate for the officer to place the shopper in a private environment. He should advise him of him his Miranda rights, and conduct an interview or interrogation to learn the truth.

Typically, during an informal interview conducted at the scene of the crime or during follow-up investigation in a suspect's home or place of business, the interview is restricted to seeking basic facts about the crime that the person may possess. Information learned in such an informal setting, early in an investigation, can be beneficial later in the investigation, as contradictions between different versions of events offered by the subject can help identify the guilty party. A false alibi offered during an informal interview conducted shortly after the commission of a crime may be easier to detect.

Interrogation Law

Rebecca Howard

Picking up” a suspect to interrogate
Before 1979 the impression generally prevailed that the police could pick up suspects for questioning. That year the U.S. supreme court held in Dunaway v. New York that a confession obtained after a pick up with out probable cause to make an actual arrest could not be used as evidence.

In Dunaway the police picked up the defendant as a suspect in an attempted robbery-murder upon the basis of a tip furnished by a jail inmate. Dunaway went along with out objection or resistance and even thought he was not booked before interrogation, a majority of the observed that the evidence showed he would have been restrained if he had refused to accompany the officers or had tried to leave, so that the circumstances were the equivalent of an arrest situation.

Therefore, because probable cause for an arrest was absent, the confession, which the court considered the product of Dunaway’s unlawful pick up was illegally obtained. Chief justice Warren Burger and Justice William Rehnquist resented argued because Dunaway had accompanied the police voluntarily and because his interrogation as preceded by the proper warnings of constitutional rights the confession was voluntary and admissible as evidence.

Dunaway won because he was in a barred locked room and should have been able to get up and leave when ever he felt like leaving.

Delay in Taking Arrestee before a Judicial Officer
A Confession must be voluntary before it may be used as evidence in a criminal case is based on the principal of protection. Police are just trying to get a confession it doesn’t matter if it’s the right one they just need the one that will help them and we need to change it back to protecting the innocent. An effect of physical harm also gets in the way of interigation some people are so afraid of getting hurt they are willing to say what ever the police want them to say or some cant take the beatings anymore and will admit to a crime even if they haven’t committed it.

Constitutional Rights and the Responsibilities of the Interrogator
Prescribed warnings ad the circumstances requiring them

In 1966 the U.S. Supreme Court established and additional requirement for confessions admissibility, one that was based on an entirely different consideration than the protection of the innocent that underlies the voluntariness test. This was created for the avowed purpose of assuring that all persons in lice custody would know of the constitutional right not to incriminate themselves.

This will no longer be applied to the educated only it is now for everyone. Miranda v. Arizona is good example. This case established the rule that before a person in police custody could be interrogated, he must be given the following warnings:

1. He has the right to remain silent, and he need not answer any questions.
2. if he does answer questions, his answers can be used as evidence against him.
3. he has a right to consult with a lawyer before or during his questioning by a police.
4. if he cannot afford to hire a lawyer, one will be provided for him without cost.
5. you can decide at any time to exercise these rights and not answer any questions or make any statements.

Miranda got off the hook for no being read his rights. He gave himself up because he was unaware of what he was allowed to say or NOT say. Now thanks to Miranda these rights must be read at the time of arrest if the police officers would like to use anything they say, also it can be read later before a confession it they want to use the confession in court.