Interrogation and Interview by Police

Despite the fact that there has been visible progress in the classification and documentation of different interrogation techniques, there is very little information about the manner in which police officers are trained and equipped with interrogation techniques and how often they apply various techniques (Cleary, H. M. D., & Warner, 2016). Little is also known about how the police officers employ the techniques with juveniles and with adults. This research examines the modern interviewing and interrogation principles and purposes for police officers. The report will examine both informal and formal interrogation techniques as well as other techniques used by the police for interrogation in the modern day and age.
The interrogation and interviewing techniques used by the police communicate some psychological intensity spectrum where various information gathering skills were employed. The tactics may involve high pressure tactics used less frequently and the frequently used tactics. Officers with Reid training are generally more prone to using manipulation and pre-interrogation techniques than the officers who do not have Reid training (Senese & John E. Reid and Associates, 2012). The techniques and analyses used are often identical both for the juvenile and the adult suspects. This is suggestion enough that police officers use the same manner of interrogation for both adults and youths. The overall result shows where police officers are highly trained in a particular interrogation method they tend to use that interrogation technique more. Cleary, H. M. D and Warner (2016) found that there was need for better law enforcement when it comes to the general interrogation training process for police officers.
Reid is an interrogation and interviewing system that has been used widely by the U.S.A. police department (Orlando, n.d.). The phrase Reid Technique of Interviewing and Interrogation is a trademark registered under John Reid and his Associates (Orlando, n.d.). The Reid technique has been criticized based on the view that the interrogation method is based on some fundamental assumptions about the human behavior which are not backed by experiential evidence. Further critics assume that the Reid interrogation technique might result to untrue confessions (McConnell, 2017). The Reid Company however disagrees with the assumption contending that the critics mischaracterize the method of interrogation and that the false testimonies are often caused by the inappropriate application of the concept by the interrogator which are not supported or backed by the Reid Company (Gudjonsson & Pearse, 2011).
The two alternative interviewing and interrogation techniques used by the police include the kinesic interview which is a method that pays attention to identifying deceptions and the PEACE (planning and preparation, explain and engage, Account, Closure & Evaluate) technique which is less of a confrontational technique applied in England (Orlando, n.d.).
Reid Interview and interrogation method
This method has three components including interviewing, analysis and interrogation. Each of the components is discussed in detail below.
Factual Analysis
According to Reid & Associates (n.d.) factual analysis is an inductive method where every suspect is individually evaluated with regard to certain specified observations that are associated with the crime. Factual analysis depends on the analysis of the crime scene and also on the information acquired concerning every suspect. The application of factual analysis yields the establishment of an estimation of the probable innocence and guilt levels of the suspect based on things like the bio of the suspect (like the marital status, occupation, race and gender), access and opportunity to get involved in the crime, behavior prior to and after a crime is committed, propensity and motivation to get involved in the crime, and the evaluation of circumstantial and physical evidence.
Factual analysis helps to note the qualities about a crime and characteristics of the suspect that will enable the police officers in their interrogation of the person believed to have committed the crime. The focus is the personality or motives of the suspects (Reid & Associates, n.d). Both the interrogation and the interview are enabled through examination of investigative findings. Factual and proper analysis of facts can help investigators in many ways including elimination of suspects who probably did not perform the crime, development of possible leads and suspects, increased confidence in the identification of whether a suspect is guilty or innocent through the process of interviewing, and identification of sound strategies for interrogation (Buckley, 2013). From the crime characteristics investigators can apparently speculate the age and gender of the suspect even without having knowledge of whom the actual offender was, their intentions, and whether that crime was spontaneous or premeditated.
For instance where there is a theft case involving an employee, by way of examining the opportunity, motivation, access, disgruntlement, and tenure, an investigator may accurately narrow down from large employee groups and pin down the stolen money to some few coworkers who are likely to be found guilty of the crime (Reid & Associates, n.d). More recently there has been much written concerning criminal profiling. It is important to note the difference between crime scene profiling and factual analysis application in the process of investigation. In criminal profiling the impression is that the characteristics of various people who are likely to have committed a crime is identified based on the crime scene analysis (Gordon & Fleisher, 2011). This procedure is deductive and utilizes inferred information from observation. With criminal profiling, police officers have a guide to help them identify likely suspects.
With factual analysis, however, inductive evaluation methods are examined with regard to observations associated with a crime (Orlando, n.d). This means that factual analysis is not just dependent on the analysis of the crime scene. It also depends on information gathered from every suspect. For instance where a crime that is being investigated looks like a motivated and spontaneous one driven by immediate and real need each of the suspects will be examined with regard to the personality trait (The goal is to identify impulsive behavior) and the motive for the crime (goal is to analyze the depth of the need). Factual analysis when applied results to the establishment of likely guild levels or innocence of the suspect on things like the bio of the suspect as previously discussed.
Interview for Behavior Analysis
Behavior analysis interviews (BAI) can be understood as a session loaded with question and answer interviews that are not accusatory in nature. The interview entails behavior provoking queries and standard investigative queries that help amplify the deception or truth symptoms of behavior from the interviewee. The investigator starts by asking background questions as a way of trying to establish the private information concerning the suspected criminal therefore allowing the investigator to analyze the spoken and unspoken cues of the suspect. The police officer conducting the investigation follows this up with investigative queries (Reid & Associates, n.d). Additionally the behavior analysis will enable the eventual guilty suspect interrogation through the establishment of a conversational rapport between the investigating officer and the suspect. This will also help develop insightful information regarding the suspected criminal and the crime itself in order to help in the formulation of an interrogation criterion.
Interrogation
Reid & Associates assert that interrogation sessions should only take place when the investigating officer has reasonable belief that the suspect being questioned is involved in the alleged crime being investigated in some way. Nine steps are involved in the Reid Interrogation and interview criteria as discussed below (Buckley, 2013).
· Positive confrontation: This is where an investigating officer informs the suspected criminal that there is enough evidence showing that they are guilty of the offence. If the suspect looks guilty in the eyes of the investigator then the statement ought to be assumed as truthful.
· Theme development: This is where the investigating officer presents moral justification or theme for the offense like morally blaming an outside party or some circumstance outside the suspect. The investigating officer will present the justification in monologue theme and use a sympathetic tone
· Handling denials: In case the suspect in question seeks permission with the intention of possibly denying what they are accused of, the investigating officer is encouraged not to allow them to speak. According to Reid & Associates (n.d) innocent suspects are not likely to seek permission to speak and are more likely to be unequivocally and promptly deny any accusations. It’s not common for innocent suspects to go past denial statements (Reid & Associates, n.d).
· Overcoming Objections: If an attempt at denying the accusation is not successful, the suspect who is guilty is likely to object to the suggestions in order to claim their apparent innocence. In such an instance the investigating officer is encouraged to accept the objection from the suspect as though what they are saying is truth instead of arguing with them. The strategy allows the investigator to develop their theme further.
· Procure and retain the attention of the suspect: It is the responsibility of the investigator to seek the attention of the suspect and to ensure that the suspect is focusing on the theme of the investigator instead of the punishment that awaits them. The investigator may be able to do this through closing the barrier of physical distance between them and the suspect. The theme should also be fashioned to the likely alternative elements.
· Handling the passive mood of the suspect: The theme of the investigator should be spiced up and intensified with concentration and presentation of the main reasons for offering the psychological justification. The investigator should also continue to show sympathy and understanding in compelling the suspected criminal to speak their truth.
· Offering alternative question: It is upon the investigator to present two alternatives in the assumption that the guilt of the suspect is developed as some logical extension to the theme with some alternative providing some better sounding crime justification. The investigating authority may support their question with some statement that encourages the suspect to make a good choice that would apparently be a more understandable alternative to explaining their reason for involvement.
· Get the suspect to relate the various offense details orally: Upon accepting a side of the available alternatives given by the investigator, the investigator ought to respond immediately with a reinforcement statement acknowledging admission of the crime from the suspect. After this the investigator will seek some brief oral review of the events prior to seeking more details.
· Changing oral confessions into written confessions: It is mandatory for the investigating police officer to convert oral confessions into recorded or written confessions. Reid and Associates (n.d) offer some guidelines like emphasizing Miranda warnings, borrowing the language of the suspect, and avoiding asking leading questions.
Peace method
The English police are trained to use interrogation and interview methods that are less confrontational than the American police officers. This less aggressive method is known as the PEACE (planning and preparation, explain and engage, Account, Closure & Evaluate) (Orlando, n.d.). Under the method the investigator will allow the suspected criminal to offer his side of the story and the investigator will not interrupt them prior to presenting them with the contradictions and inconsistencies between the evidence they provide and the story they tell. The investigator is not allowed to deceive the suspected criminal in the interview process (Meissner et al., 2012).
The PEACE method has an APP (Authorized Professional Practice) guidance criterion on the UK policing. The following details explain the PEACE method.
Planning and preparation: An interview is supposed to create some written plan that focuses on issues like the interview objectives and interview order. The interview plan ought to include the time that a suspected criminal has spent in custody, the topics covered, and the points that are necessary for proving that the offence happened or some defense. Any interview ought to consider the interviewees characteristics that are pertinent to the laid out plan such as cultural background which is likely to influence the preferences of the suspect on the way they ought to be conversed with. The interviewer may have to consider realistic arrangements like visiting the location or scene of that interview.
Explain and Engage: It is the duty of the interviewer to engage the suspect by way of using keen listening in order to establish some rapport with them. The investigator should offer reasons why the interview is taking place and the objectives of the interview. The investigator ought also to explain the expectations and routines of the entire process such as explaining that they will be taking notes. The interviewer ought to encourage the suspect to provide information they deem fundamental to the process.
Account: An investigating officer is charged with the responsibility of using appropriate active listening and questioning skills to retrieve the account of the suspect. The questions asked ought to be non-complicated. The interviewer should also clarify and complex statements to allow better detail for the suspect’s account. It is important to avoid multiple questions in order to void as much as possible to confuse or lead the suspect to giving expected answers.
Closure: In this stage the plan is to try as much as possible to avoid abrupt and sudden end to an interview. The interviewer ought to summarize the account given by the suspect and allow them to clarify issues and ask follow-up questions.
Evaluate: The interviewer ought to analyze the interview in order to assess the account of the interviewee wholesomely. Further the interviewer should determine whether there is any necessary action. Finally the interviewer should reflect on the performance of the interview.
Kinesic Interview
This method entails evaluating the behavior of a person in order to identify any deception (Walters, 2017). This method is quite similar to Reid technique. The Kinesic study is a study of the nonverbal communication. During analysis the investigating officer will employ various techniques aimed at making any observations and evaluations from the behavior of the suspect. This will help them determine whether the suspect is being deceptive or truthful or perhaps assist them in determining the areas where there is more sensitivity hence requiring more attention through oral inquiry (Walters, 2017).
Walters (2017) described 4 primary interview stages including orientation, narration, cross examination, and finally, resolution. The gathered information will be employed by the investigator in the first stage in order to fashion an interrogation criteria on a specific subject. During interrogation the deception cycle has to be broken by the interrogator according to Walters (2017). This will include the confrontation of the negative responses from the suspect. There are various strategies of interrogation for various types of personalities according to Walters (2017). More than thirty principles of Kinesic have been discussed by Walters (2017). The principles allude to the fact that there is no spoken or unspoken behavior that can be used to prove that a person is being deceptive or truthful.



References
Buckley, J. P. (2013). The Reid Technique of interviewing and interrogation. In Investigative Interviewing: Rights, Research and Regulation (pp. 190–206). Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781843926337
Cleary, H. M. D., & Warner, T. C. (2016). Police Training in Interviewing and Interrogation Methods: A Comparison of Techniques Used with Adult and Juvenile Suspects. Law and Human Behavior, 40(3), 270–284. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000175
Gordon, N. J., & Fleisher, W. L. (2011). Effective Interviewing and Interrogation Techniques. Effective Interviewing and Interrogation Techniques. Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2009-0-62838-5
Gudjonsson, G. H., & Pearse, J. (2011). Suspect interviews and false confessions. Current Directions in Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721410396824
McConnell, B. (2017). Criminal Interview and Interrogation in Serious Crime Investigations.
Meissner, C. A., Redlich, A. D., Bhatt, S., & Brandon, S. E. (2012). Interview and interrogation methods and their effects on true and false confessions. Campbell Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2012.13
Orlando, J. (n.d.). Interrogation Techniques, OLR Research Report. Retrieved 31 December, 2018 from https://www.cga.ct.gov/2014/rpt/2014-R-0071.htm
Reid J.E. & Associates (n.d.). The Reid Technique. Retrieved 31 December, 2018 from http://www.reid.com/educational_info/critictechnique.html
Senese, L. C., & John E. Reid and Associates. (2012). Anatomy of interrogation themes: The Reid technique of interviewing and interrogation. Chicago: John E. Reid and Associates.
Walters, S. B. (2017). Principles of Kinesic Interview and Interrogation, Third Edition. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press