Interrogation

 Law enforcement personnel receive extensive training on how best to interrogate a suspect.  Simply stated, interrogation is the systematic questioning in order to obtain information.  But the process is much more complicated.

If you are being interrogated whether you committed a crime or not, ask for an attorney.  There is never a situation where you are better off without an attorney.

As stated previously, if you have an attorney law enforcement can not interrogate you without your attorney present.  Attorneys are also trained in interrogation and can give you expert advice on how, or even it, to answer a question.

During an interrogation, law enforcement is under no obligation to tell the truth.  However if a suspect answers a question, they are required to be truthful.

Law enforcement’s ultimate goal when interrogating a suspect is to get a confession.

Interrogation techniques include:

• Confrontation: Informing the suspect that they are the focus of an investigation 
• Theme development: Trying to understand the suspect’s thought process and what might motivate them to confess 
• Handling denials: Trying to minimize the number of times the suspect denies involvement 
• Presenting an alternative question: Offering two options, one of which is more socially acceptable 
• Deception: Using false claims to get the suspect to confess 
• Intimidation: Yelling, throwing papers, or keeping the suspect in the interrogation room for hours 
• Fabricating evidence: Claiming that the suspect’s fingerprints or DNA were found at the crime scene 
• Leading questions: Asking questions that are intended to get a specific response 
• Good cop, bad cop: Having one officer be aggressive and the other be sympathetic 

Law enforcement must follow rules and limitations to respect the suspect’s rights and prevent false confessions.

One of the most widespread interrogation models is The Reid Technique.  This technique was developed by a polygraph expert and former police office in the 1950’s.  The technique is known for creating a high pressure environment for the interviewee, followed by sympathy and offers of understanding and help, but only if a confession is forthcoming. 

Proponents of the Reid technique say it is useful in extracting information from otherwise unwilling suspects. Critics say the technique results in an unacceptably high rate of false confessions, especially from juveniles and people with mental impairments. Criticism has also been leveled in the opposite case—that against strong-willed interviewees, the technique causes them to stop talking and give no information whatsoever, rather than elicit lies that can be checked against for the guilty or exonerating details for the innocent. 

The Reid technique’s nine steps of interrogation are:

1. Positive confrontation. Advise the suspect that the evidence has led the police to the individual as a suspect. Offer the person an early opportunity to explain why the offense took place.
2. Try to shift the blame away from the suspect to some other person or set of circumstances that prompted the suspect to commit the crime. That is, develop themes containing reasons that will psychologically justify or excuse the crime. Themes may be developed or changed to find one to which the accused is most responsive.
3. Try to minimize the frequency of suspect denials.
4. At this point, the accused will often give a reason why he or she or they did not or could not commit the crime. Try to use this to move towards the acknowledgement of what they did.
5. Reinforce sincerity to ensure that the suspect is receptive.
6. The suspect will become quieter and listen. Move the theme of the discussion toward offering alternatives. If the suspect cries at this point, infer guilt.
7. Pose the “alternative question”, giving two choices for what happened; one more socially acceptable than the other. The suspect is expected to choose the easier option but whichever alternative the suspect chooses, guilt is admitted. There is always a third option which is to maintain that they did not commit the crime.
8. Lead the suspect to repeat the admission of guilt in front of witnesses and develop corroborating information to establish the validity of the confession.
9. Document the suspect’s admission or confession and have him or her prepare a recorded statement (audio, video or written).

A different technique has gained some usage in recent years.  The PEACE method of investigative interviewing is a five stage[1][2] process in which investigators try to build rapport and allow a criminal suspect to provide their account of events uninterrupted, before presenting the suspect with any evidence of inconsistencies or contradictions. It is used to obtain a full account of events from a suspect rather than just seeking a confession – which is the goal of the Reid technique, in which interrogators are more aggressive, accusatory, and threatening in terms of proposing consequences for the suspect’s failure to confess to the crime.

The five steps of the PEACE Method are:

Planning and preparation

This requires investigators to find out as much as they can about the incident under investigation, including who needs to be interviewed and why.

Engage and Explain

The purpose of this stage is to establish rapport and is described in the literature as the most influential aspect in whether or not an interview is successful. It involves showing concern for the subject’s welfare by asking how they want to be addressed, how much time they’ve got available to be interviewed and giving reassurance if the person seems anxious or nervous.[5]

Account — Clarification and challenge

This stage is where interviewer attempts to obtain a full account of events from the subject without interrupting. Once the subject has explained what happened, the interviewer can ask follow up questions which allow them to expand and clarify their account of events. If necessary this may involve challenging aspects of the interviewee’s story if contradictory information is available.

Closure

This stage involves summarizing the subject’s account of what happened and is designed to ensure there is mutual understanding between interviewer and interviewee about what has taken place. It also involves verifying that everything that needs to be discussed has been covered.

Evaluation

This stage requires the interviewer to examine whether they achieved what they wanted from the interview; to review the status of the investigation in the light of any new information that was received; and to reflect upon how well the interview went and what, if anything, could have been done differently.[5]

Summary

There are many other tactics used by law enforcement to intterogate a suspect.  Remember they receive extensive training and a suspect is never in a position to out-smart the questioner.  

The only questions you are required to answer are your name and basic identification.  Beyond that do not answer any questions.  As soon as you request a lawyer they are prohibited from asking additional questions.