Goal #4 Objective C


Objective C:
Without the use of the course text or class notes, the student will identify the investigative follow-up aspects of interrogation.
interrogation -
The questioning process used for a suspect, or a suspect's family, friends or associates (people who are likely to withhold information of be deceptive).

Investigative follow-up aspects of interrogation:

The Purpose of Interrogation
Why People Confess
Why Some People Do Not Confess
Miranda Guidelines
Preparation for Interrogation
The Steps of an Interrogation
Nonverbal Communication

The Purpose of Interrogation -
The purpose of interrogation is to elicit information from a suspect who may surpress the facts, or from people whose answers might be colored by close ties to a suspect.

The primary goal of the interrogative process is to obtain information detrimental to the suspect's case.

Osterburg identifies three other possible results that may be achieved on page 313 -314.

Why People Confess -
Research by M. W. Horowitz indicates there are five social-psychological conditions which help explain why a person confesses.

Five Social-Psychological Conditions

Accusation -
The person being interrogated must be mentally or visually aware of an accusation. The accusation may be explicit or implied.

Whether guilty or innocent, the accused is in a difficult position. The accused feels cornered and their freedom feels in jeopardy. The impact of accusation is subjective and is dependent on the individual.

Evidence is Available -
After accusation, the accused reacts with worry and becomes unsettled. The accused must be made feel that incriminating "evidence is available."

When hard evidence is presented, many persons at some point consider themselves "caught with the goods."

Presentation of the hard evidence is not always necessary, sometimes the psychological impact alone becomes overwhelming.

Reinforcing that a co-offender is "just starting to talk" or that the evidence has "been sent to the lab," may result in raising anxiety and provoking a confession.

Playing one co-offender against another (using the revelations of the other) is an additional means of making the accused feel that incriminating "evidence is available."

Most suspects don't know motive has no evidence value, instead they believe motive is additional evidence by providing a reason for the crime.

Forces -- Friendly and Hostile -
The investigator conducting an interrogation should capitalize on factors which contribute to psychological uneasiness on the part of the person being questioned.

Therefore, any legally permitted action that either reduces the forces friendly to the suspect, or increases the hostile forces can enhance the possibility of a confession.

This is why an interrogation is not conducted in a place of choice familiar and comfortable to the suspect.

Guilt Feelings -
Most people are capable of having feelings of guilt. Additionally when many people feel guilty they, become stressed and the only way to relieve that stress is to "get it off their chest."

Unfortunately, not every act of criminal conduct (even murder) produce feelings of guilt in everyone. Some people very effectively rationalize criminal conduct and have no remorse. This does not mean they are not capable of remorse, they just don't feel it for this particular act.

A seasoned investigator will try to assess the "value" system that guides the suspect's behavior. If possible, the investigator will try to correlate the criminal conduct to the suspect's "value" system. If this can be achieved then the investigator may build on other psychological stress and further disrupt the suspect's inner peace.

Confession -- The Way Out -
The accumulation of accusation, evidence, hostile force and guilty feelings can cause an individual to feel isolated and alone -- vulnerable and weak.

This is where the investigator opens the door to deliverance and mental freedom -- the confession.

Why Some People Do Not Confess -
Obtaining a confession has been compared to a psychological game of chess, it's not easy.

Investigators normally interrogate people who are uncooperative and facing the sanctions of fine or imprisonment.

Reasons offered by Osterburg for persons not confessing to criminal behavior:

Miranda Guidelines -

implementing the Miranda waiver --
Most law enforcement agencies print cards with the Miranda Waiver printed on it.

The movies and television has contributed to the misbelief that people must be advised of their rights at the time they are arrested. The fact is that many people are arrested every day, lawfully, and never advised of their rights.

To properly understand the Miranda decision, one must understand that it is an attempt by the US Supreme Court to insure the US Constitution is carried out. One of the main concepts behind the Constitution was to protect individuals from the abuses of government. The court (US Supreme Court) has the Constitutional responsibility to the court to insure that the Constitution is not violated and the individual rights established therein are protected.

The only remedy available to the court when a Constitutional violation is found is exclusion. Exclusion can be in the form of an individual piece of evidence or an entire case.

In the Miranda decision, the court drafted a procedure that officers needed to apply during interrogation.

The court even identified when it needed to be applied.

"The prosecution may not use statements...stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination. By custodial interrogation, we mean questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a person has been taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way."

Generally speaking, the Miranda Warning must be given prior to asking a suspect any questions about his or her involvement in criminal activity. These type of questions are called "incriminating."

incriminating-
To accuse of criminal activity.

So before an investigator asks a suspect an incriminating question, the investigator must advise the suspect of the Miranda Waiver.

A law enforcement officer can engage in other "general" questioning, not of an incriminating nature, without waiver.

Therefore, a person could be logically arrested and convicted without ever hearing their rights from a law enforcement officer.

When a person agrees to talk with a law enforcement officer (or investigator) about involvement in criminal activity, it is important that the LEO or investigator properly document for later presentation in court, that the suspect was advised of his or her rights and that the rights were voluntarily waived.

Most law enforcement agencies have preprinted "Waiver of Rights" forms (example on page 330).

The court requires an expressed statement that that the individual is willing to make a statement and does not want an attorney. This may serve as proof of a waiver of rights.

Preparation for Interrogation -
The interrogation is normally one of the last steps of any investigation.

Is this because it ranks near the bottom in terms of importance? Hardly.

The outcome of many investigations frequently hinge on the result of a successful interrogation.

The investigator conducts the interrogation near the end of the investigation because the investigator wants all of the facts in hand before confronting the individual he or she feels committed the crime.

Preparation

The Interrogation Room

The Steps of an Interrogation -

Positive Confrontation -
After the suspect acknowledges understanding the rights and waived them, leave the suspect's presence for about 30 seconds. Then return to the suspect and accuse him or her of the crime and provide innuendoes about evidence to support accusations.

Let the suspect know there is no doubt in your mind of his or her guilt. Set back and observe the suspect's body language and behavior for 15-20 seconds. Repeat the confrontation and progress to theme development.

Theme Development -
In this phase you develop excuses or reasons the suspect can use to rationalize or justify having committed the crime, hopefully making it easier for the suspect to admit guilt while saving face. Deliver the themes in a sympathetic manner and evaluate the suspect's response, both verbal and nonverbal.

Handling Denials -
A denial is a refusal by the suspect to accept the truthfulness of your allegation of his or her guilt. Denial may occur frequently throughout all phases of the interrogation. Denials will come from both the innocent and guilty. The difference is that the innocent person will not let the investigator get past the denial phase. The investigator handles the guilty person's denial by cutting them off short, either verbally or with gestures.

Overcoming Objections -
An objection is a reason why the suspect could not possibly by guilty of the crime. This is an offensive move by the suspect to regain control of the interrogation after you have effectively stopped the denial phase. Contrary to denials, the investigator should not stop objections. The investigator should incorporate it into an existing theme, giving the suspect an acceptable reason for committing the crime.

Getting Suspect's Attention -
At this point, the suspect will likely be on the defensive -- being cautious about what is said, totally ignoring what the investigator is saying, worrying about going to jail, on edge and very uncomfortable. This is the time to intensify the theme the suspect seems to be reacting to. Seize the suspect's attention by physically moving toward the suspect. At the same time the investigator should maintain the sincerity level, establish eye contact, and call the suspect by their first name. Together these actions tend to force the suspect's attention back on you.

Suspect Quiets & Listens -
This is the first step that indicates the suspect is about to surrender and is about ready to give up. The suspect may appear to become less tense and may slump and appear defeated, the suspect may even start to cry. This is where the suspect will start to listen to what you have to say and may take one of the themes and give it real meaning.

Offering Alternatives -
In the context of an interrogation, an alternative is a question presented to the suspect in which the opportunity to admit to one of two incriminating answers. One of the two answers should be a justifiable reason for committing the offense. The other answer is socially unacceptable. For example "You didn't really mean to stab the guy, did you?" "You only wanted the money, right?" This gives the suspect the opportunity to admit the robbery, but not attempted murder -- a less acceptable choice.

When the suspect answers, the investigator should give reinforcement. "You know, Jim, I felt you weren't the kind of person that wanted to hurt anybody." This is where you begin to get the details of the crime.

Bringing Suspect into Conversation -
This is where the investigator begins to get the suspect to address his or her involvement in the crime. The investigator should keep the initial questions short and answerable with just a few words. Avoid terminology that may inflame the suspect's emotions or would cause the suspect to withdraw from the conversation.

After the basics of the crime have been covered with simple questions the investigator should move to more open ended questions to get the suspect talking. The investigator may want to remind the suspect of the importance of telling the truth.

Obtaining Suspect's Statement -
Once the investigator has talked out the details of the crime with the suspect, it is time to take a written statement. At this point it is important to remember that all of the facts of the crime should be reviewed with the suspect because the act of writing a statement may cause the suspect to change their mind and refuse to cooperate. This is where a video tape of these steps of interrogation is of great value. The suspect will have already made his or her confession on tape if they change their mind.

Nonverbal Communication -
An investigator looks beyond mere words that are spoken during a interrogation. Nonverbal communication consists of physical body movements such as position changes, facial expressions, eye contact, and fidgeting. Nonverbals can reinforce verbal communications or they can totally contradict what a person is saying. An understanding of body language can give the investigator clues to the suspect's veracity and posture during the interrogation.


Continue to Goal #5.
Return to Course Learning GoalsPage