Skip to main content
Other Undergraduate 3,568 words

Mock Police Investigative Interview: Hospital Assault Case Study

~18 min read 6 sections Law · Investigation
Abstract

This paper presents a hypothetical investigative interview conducted by a Queensland Police Service constable with a registered nurse who witnessed an alleged assault on a colleague at the Central Queensland Hospital and Health Service. The suspect, a combat veteran diagnosed with PTSD, allegedly struck a nurse and destroyed a computer monitor after learning his prescription medication had been changed without prior notification. The interview demonstrates proper police interview procedure, including rights advisement, open-ended questioning, and witness rapport-building. It also explores contextual factors such as PTSD, medication management, and the challenges healthcare workers face when treating traumatized veterans.

Key Takeaways
  • Purpose and Case Background: Overview of the alleged hospital assault incident
  • Suspect and Victim Profiles: Backgrounds of the veteran suspect and nursing staff
  • Interview Setup and Rights Advisement: Interview logistics, rights, and introductions
  • Witness Account of the Assault: Jennifer's detailed narrative of the assault
  • Post-Incident Response and Reporting: Security response and incident documentation steps
  • Contextual Factors and Closing Observations: Medication dispute context and witness final remarks
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples

What makes this paper effective

  • The script format presents a realistic, step-by-step model of witness interview procedure, making abstract policing concepts concrete and observable.
  • The interviewer uses a skillful blend of open-ended prompts ("Tell me in your own words") and targeted follow-up questions, demonstrating best-practice interview technique throughout.
  • Contextual details about PTSD, traumatic brain injury, and medication management are naturally embedded in the dialogue, enriching the scenario without requiring separate exposition.
  • The paper humanizes both the suspect and the victim, avoiding reductive characterizations while still maintaining the procedural objectivity expected of a police interview.

Key academic technique demonstrated

The paper demonstrates applied scenario construction — building a realistic, multi-layered fact pattern and then working through it systematically using a structured interview framework. The technique shows how legal rights advisement, witness rapport, chronological narrative elicitation, and behavioral observation all function together within a single investigative encounter.

Structure breakdown

The paper opens with a stated purpose and detailed case background, followed by suspect and victim profiles. The body consists of a full interview transcript divided naturally into: rights advisement and introductions; prior incident history; the assault narrative; post-incident actions and reporting; and a closing discussion of motivating factors. The conclusion captures the witness's humanizing final remarks and the interviewer's procedural close-out steps.

Essay 3,568 words

Purpose and Case Background

The purpose of this mock investigative interview is to present the results of a hypothetical interview with a witness to an alleged physical assault on a registered nurse, "Martha," at the Central Queensland Hospital and Health Service, a tertiary medical center, on 30 July 2020 at approximately 0933 hours.

It has been alleged that the suspect walked into an office at the hospital and became extremely agitated, at which point he struck a registered nurse in the face with his fist, then picked up the computer monitor from her desk and smashed it against a wall. The estimated cost of the destroyed computer monitor was $200. No other patients or visitors were involved in the incident.

The registered nurse who was the victim of the assault works in the Community Mental Health Service and specializes in the treatment of adults suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), with a special emphasis on helping disabled Australian combat veterans who served during Operation Slipper (late 2014) and Operation Highroad (early 2015) in Afghanistan as members of the Australian Defence Force.

Suspect and Victim Profiles

The veteran suspected of the assault is a married, 50-year-old male combat veteran, "Benjamin Johnson," who served in Afghanistan from January 2014 through February 2015. During his combat tour, Benjamin suffered a severe traumatic brain injury (STBI) as a direct result of an improvised explosive device explosion that also injured several other troops in his vehicle. In addition to the STBI, Mr. Johnson suffered a broken mandible, a lacerated pancreas, two broken ankles, and a fractured right femur. To date, Mr. Johnson has undergone 17 orthopedic procedures and is currently walking with a normal gait, appearing fully recovered physically from his service-connected injuries.

During his military service, Mr. Johnson rose to the rank of staff sergeant and was ultimately assigned to lead a platoon of Australian Army soldiers prior to his injury and discharge. Following his initial treatment in Afghanistan, Mr. Johnson was returned to Australia for follow-up medical treatment and rehabilitation. After a two-month inpatient stay, he was discharged from the military and returned to civilian life in Queensland, where he remains married and employed as a machinist. Mr. and Mrs. Johnson have two adult children who live nearby but do not visit regularly.

The hypothetical interview that follows was conducted on September 10, 2020, at 1000 hours by Constable [Instructor] at an interview office at the Queensland Police Service. This case was assigned to the constable to investigate the alleged assault on Martha. The interviewee, "Jennifer," is another registered nurse who works with Martha, witnessed the alleged assault, and agreed to provide a detailed account of the incident.

Interview Setup and Rights Advisement

Constable (Cindy): Good morning. Please have a seat and make yourself comfortable. I'm Constable [Instructor] and I've been assigned to this case. I've been a law enforcement officer in Queensland in some capacity for more than 15 years. The gentleman to my right is Mr. John Manning, who will record our interview but will not be asking any questions. Thank you very much for agreeing to meet with me this morning.

First, let's take care of the legalities. I must inform you that you do not have to say or do anything, but anything you say or do may be given in evidence in a court of law of competent jurisdiction. Do you understand that?

Jennifer: Yes.

Cindy: In addition, I must also inform you that you have the following rights. You may communicate with, or attempt to communicate with, a friend or relative to inform that person of your whereabouts. You may also communicate with, or attempt to communicate with, a legal practitioner. Do you understand that?

Jennifer: Yes, I do.

Cindy: Thank you. Do you have any questions about these rights?

Jennifer: No, I understand.

Cindy: We have coffee and doughnuts if you'd like them, and please let me know if you need to take a restroom break or get a drink of water at any time, okay?

Jennifer: Okay, thanks. I'll pass on the coffee and doughnuts — I had a snack on the way over here.

Cindy: Okay, great. Now, please state your full name, occupation, and length of time working here at Central Queensland Hospital.

Jennifer: My full name is Jennifer R. Johnson. I'm a registered nurse working as an occupational rehabilitation specialist. I've worked here since 2011 — almost 10 years now.

Cindy: What is your position title at the hospital?

Jennifer: I'm the project manager in charge of risk management at the hospital, which, I know, makes this incident especially ironic — but all the more important to prevent in the future.

Cindy: We can all agree on that. At any rate, I've read the incident report about the altercation with Mr. Johnson, and working with and helping disabled combat veterans suffering from PTSD must be a challenging but highly rewarding profession. Do you and your co-workers enjoy working with veterans?

Jennifer: Yes, we love our veteran patients. We hold them in high esteem and regard them as national heroes, but there are some downsides as well, that's for sure.

Cindy: Such as?

Jennifer: Well, on one occasion, an intoxicated veteran who had been diagnosed with HIV vomited on my desk during a counseling session, and I've been assaulted by patients more than once in the past.

Cindy: You were assaulted by patients?

Jennifer: Yes.

Cindy: Were they also combat veterans?

Jennifer: One of them was, I know for sure, but I'm uncertain about the other individual.

Cindy: Can you tell me what happened?

Jennifer: The first instance involved a patient with PTSD and some other comorbidities who, as it turned out, had stopped taking his medications and started hallucinating as a result, imagining that everyone around him was trying to harm him.

Cindy: What do you mean by comorbidities?

Jennifer: I'm sorry — I should have just said "other disorders." I mean that many of these patients also have additional medical conditions that exacerbate their PTSD.

Cindy: Thank you. Can you tell me what happened next with that first instance of assault?

Jennifer: Well, as I was saying, this patient believed everyone was trying to hurt him, and all of a sudden he jumped out of his chair and started running into a wall over and over. When I tried to stop him to keep him from hurting himself, he knocked me over. I'm not sure whether he intended to assault me, but that was the end result.

Cindy: Were you injured?

Jennifer: No, not really. I was just scared and shaken more than anything else.

Cindy: You stated you had been assaulted more than once. Can you tell me about the other incident?

Jennifer: There was only one other notable incident that involved a physical attack. A patient came into our office mistaking it for the dermatology service, and when I told him he was in the wrong office, he slapped me for no apparent reason. Although I notified our security service immediately and filed a patient incident report, I don't believe this individual was ever apprehended and we never saw him again. I don't know whether he was a veteran or had PTSD, but I do know he was violent for no apparent reason.

Witness Account of the Assault

Cindy: Thank you. All of that sounds far more than just challenging — which leads us to the incident in question. Please tell me in your own words what happened.

Jennifer: We had just finished our weekly staff meeting and everyone had returned to their desks when Mr. Johnson entered our office.

Cindy: Mr. Johnson is the individual alleged to have committed the assault against your coworker and then destroyed a computer monitor?

Jennifer: Yes.

Cindy: What was the date, time, and duration of the incident?

Jennifer: I remember that the incident took place on a Thursday, since that's when we have our staff meetings. The last Thursday in July was the 30th, so that's when it occurred. The meeting wrapped up at about 9:30 a.m. and we all returned to our desks immediately, so it must have taken place just a few minutes after that.

Cindy: Where did it happen?

Jennifer: The assault happened in the quality assurance and risk assessment and management office on the second floor of Central Queensland Hospital, at Martha's desk.

Cindy: How did it happen?

Jennifer: Well, we're trained to handle disruptive and combative patients, so we're generally ready for anything, but the incident with Mr. Johnson was different.

Cindy: What do you mean?

Jennifer: First, I noticed Mr. Johnson immediately when he entered the office because he was being loud and vulgar and sounded very angry. Second, over the past few years I had seen Mr. Johnson on several occasions and we had even conversed in a friendly fashion a couple of times while he waited for an appointment with Martha, so I knew immediately that this situation was different. Although I did not know — or need to know — the details of his case, it was common knowledge in our office that he was being treated for PTSD at the time, because Martha was our specialist assigned to him.

Cindy: Do you see many veterans with PTSD?

Jennifer: More than you might think. Tens of thousands of Australian soldiers served in Afghanistan, and while the vast majority have returned to normal lives after their military service, many have experienced severe problems transitioning back to civilian life after discharge, and far too many even take their own lives as a result.

Cindy: Was there anything else unusual that you can recall about the incident with Mr. Johnson?

Jennifer: I also recall that our receptionist admonished him to calm down and have a seat, but he brushed right past her and walked up to Martha's desk, loudly demanding to know why his medications had been changed. We see angry patients all the time, including those whose medications had been changed or cancelled, but there was a sense of urgency in Mr. Johnson's voice that made me pay close attention to what was happening between him and Martha.

Cindy: Can you give me some details about what you heard?

Jennifer: I heard Martha ask Mr. Johnson to please calm down while she attempted to explain that the change in his medication had been ordered by his treating physician and she had nothing to do with it. After hearing Martha's explanation, Mr. Johnson became even more agitated and struck her.

Cindy: Which hand did he use and where did he strike her?

Jennifer: Let me think [pause]. It all happened so fast. Okay — I remember now. Mr. Johnson punched Martha in the face with his right hand, hard.

Cindy: Did Mr. Johnson use an open hand or a fist to strike Martha?

Jennifer: I think his hand was clenched into a fist.

Cindy: Please demonstrate how Mr. Johnson struck Martha, using me as a reference.

Jennifer: [Jennifer makes a swinging motion with her arm and imitates Mr. Johnson's fist striking Cindy's chin.]

Cindy: Thank you. I understand now. What happened after Mr. Johnson struck Martha?

Jennifer: Martha was still sitting in her desk chair, but after he hit her she scooted her chair back as far away from Mr. Johnson as she could.

Cindy: Did anyone else see it happen? Who? What did they say? What did they do?

Jennifer: Everyone in our office saw what happened. There were three of us at the time: me, Martha, and our receptionist, Millie. Immediately after the incident, another nurse who witnessed the attack — Jeff — and I were on the phone desperately trying to reach security when Mr. Johnson picked up the computer monitor on Martha's desk and, based on what I could see from my vantage point, smashed it into pieces against the wall behind her. Glass and debris flew everywhere, but the monitor did not hit Martha, thank goodness. She was all tangled up in computer cables, though, and she later told us that the edge of her keyboard had hit her in the stomach.

Cindy: What did you do in response to the incident?

Jennifer: As I said, Jeff and I were already on the phone with security, but someone else from another service had already contacted them after hearing the shouting coming from our office. Immediately after I hung up, three hospital security officers arrived, restrained Mr. Johnson without any further incident, and then escorted him from our office.

Cindy: What did you say in response to the incident?

Jennifer: The first thing I did was scream, "Why did you do that, you idiot!?" at Mr. Johnson — a reaction I now regret because it was unprofessional, but I was angry and scared that he would do something even worse. At that point the security officers arrived and took Mr. Johnson into custody. The next thing I did was check on Martha. She was still seated at her desk, crying with her face in her hands. The left side of her face was bruised and swollen, but she insisted she was all right and did not require medical attention. We got her an ice pack and decided to keep an eye on her just in case, but she appeared more shaken up than anything else.

Cindy: How did the subject react to your response?

Jennifer: You know, it was the strangest thing. After I screamed at him, it was like the air seeping out of a balloon — a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde kind of transformation.

Cindy: How do you mean?

Jennifer: Well, one second he was positively livid — beet red in the face, spittle coming from his mouth, screaming at Martha at the top of his lungs, threatening her and his treating physician with violence — and the next minute, after he had struck Martha and thrown the computer monitor, he was completely quiet, subdued, and all the color had drained from his face. It was as if he didn't know where he was or what he had been doing, and had just woken up all of a sudden and realized what was going on.

Cindy: How long did all of this take?

Jennifer: The whole thing was over in less than 15 seconds or so, but the incident played out in slow motion, so it seemed like an eternity — at least to me.

Cindy: So Mr. Johnson's actions when he first entered your office were sufficiently extreme and out of the ordinary that you paid closer attention to what happened afterward than you might have with another patient?

Jennifer: Yes, that's exactly right.

Cindy: Do you have any reason to believe that Mr. Johnson was pretending to be angry — perhaps in an effort to obtain a preferred drug from his treating physician?

Jennifer: Well, that does happen sometimes and we've encountered those types of patients before, but I can say this: Mr. Johnson was not pretending to be angry — that much was clear to me at the time. Moreover, he did not appear to be in any drug-withdrawal type of distress but was rather agitated over his change in medication. We do have protocols in place for dealing with drug-seeking patients, but based on my experience with these types of situations, this was not that kind of reaction. He was genuinely angry and even a little terrified.

Cindy: Thank you. So from your perspective, the subject was primarily angry because his medication had been changed without his prior knowledge — is that correct?

Jennifer: Yes, that's correct.

Cindy: Did anyone else say or do anything to Mr. Johnson that may have also triggered this incident?

Jennifer: I'm not sure. As I noted previously, our receptionist asked him to calm down and have a seat, but he just ignored her. I couldn't see the entire incident from my desk — only the part where Mr. Johnson struck Martha and then smashed her computer monitor against the wall behind her. I only learned she had not been struck by the monitor when I got up from my desk and rushed to assist her.

2 Sections Hidden · 630 words
Post-Incident Response and Reporting320 words
Cindy: Did you report this to anyone in management? To whom? When? What did they say and/or do?…
Contextual Factors and Closing Observations310 words
Cindy: Do you know why the incident occurred?
Key Concepts in This Paper
Investigative Interview PTSD Combat Veteran Witness Statement Rights Advisement Hospital Security Medication Change Traumatic Brain Injury Police Procedure Incident Reporting
Cite This Paper
PaperDue. (2026). Mock Police Investigative Interview: Hospital Assault Case Study. PaperDue. https://www.paperdue.com/study-guide/mock-investigative-interview-hospital-assault-2175487

Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.