Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Interviews and Interrogation
Interview and Interrogation
According to Borum, Gelles and Kleinman (2009) law enforcement interrogators historically have made a distinction between the concepts of an interview and an interrogation. One commonly understood difference is that the purpose of an interview is to gather information, whereas the primary purpose of an interrogation is to garner a confession from a suspect who is presumed to be guilty.
Another difference (Inbau, 2001) involves the presence or absence of an accusation during the interaction. An interview is non-accusatory. During an interview, the investigator is encouraged to adopt a neutral and objective attitude and is instructed not to accuse the subject of wrongdoing. By contrast, an interrogation is accusatory. The interrogator will often begin an interrogation by directly accusing the suspect of committing the crime that is under investigation, and the entire interaction will revolve around that accusation.
Inbau (2001) notes the goals of the two processes are different. The primary goal of an interview is to gather information that is relevant...
This information includes the who, what, when, where, why, and how of any criminal investigation and can also involve assessing the credibility of the source of the information. The goal of an interrogation is not to gather basic information regarding a crime and a suspect's potential culpability but to learn the truth about the details of the crime from someone who is suspected of committing the crime. This truth will often involve the confession of the suspect who is interrogated.
Another distinction between interviews and interrogations is that interviews tend to be flexible and free flowing interactions, whereas interrogations are generally more tightly structured. An interview is a dialogue between the investigator and the subject. It is a question and answer session in which both parties may ask questions and give answers. The investigator normally has several key points that he or she wants to cover, but these points may be altered as the dialogue unfolds. In contrast, an interrogation involves active persuasion on the part of the interrogator. As a consequence, the investigator will dominate…
References
Borum, R., Gelles, G.G., & Kleinman, S.M. (2009, January). Interview and interrogation: A perspective and update from the U.S.A. University of South Florida. In Selected Works, Draft Version, Chapter 6. Retrieved May 17, 2011 from http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1043&context=randy_borum&sei-redir=1#search="the+difference+between+interrigations+and+interviews
Find Law. (2011). Miranda warnings and police questioning. FindLaw. Retrieved May 17, 2011 from http://criminal.findlaw.com/crimes/criminal_rights/your-rights-miranda/when-miranda-required.html
Inbau, F.E. (2001). Criminal interrogation and confessions. 4th ed J.E. Reid, J.P. Buckley, & B.C. Jayne (Eds.) New York: Aspen Publishers.
Tactics and Techniques of Successful Interviews Interviewing is definitely an art form. There are a number of different tactics and techniques that law enforcement agencies utilize depending on the unique elements of each individual situation. Still, there are some techniques that prove strong in almost any situation. Thus, the technique of theme development and alternative questioning are incredibly useful across situational contexts, making them a tried and proven interview tactic. One of
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
F.A: Yes, if you work with any software especially developing websites you will face many problems, but you should be patient to solve them (1). I.A: Definitely, my career has always centered on developing various applications and programs to our clients. As a Project Team Leader, I am always involved from start to finish with the software projects I am assigned to lead (3). H.A: Yes I have, I worked with drilling
.. information or a confession, punishing him for an act he... has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him (qtd. "United Nations"). The effects of the Abu Gharib scandal, and the other interrogation concerns coming from Guantanamo Bay, led to the recently passed Military Commissions Act, which further clarifies the United States' position on the use of alternative interrogation methods and what is and is not
196). While the reader does not want to admit this could happen in the United States, after reading this book it does not seem so far-fetched, and that is a frightening, even unspeakable conclusion. The fact that the government condones these torture techniques is bad enough. The situation at Guantanamo Bay underscores how deeply the government has delved into torture and other forms of detention that fly in the
The Rationale for and the Efficacy of Torture during Interrogation Although information from interrogational torture is unreliable, it is likely to be used frequently and harshly. ==John W. Schiemann, 2012 Introduction The epigraph above is indicative of the growing consensus concerning the lack of efficacy of torture in providing interrogators with reliable concealed information Concealed information is the foundation of the majority of security issues. In most cases, concealed information is a situation