Conducting Interview & Interrogation IP3
To: Chief detective
From:
Date: 24th February 2017
Ref: Conducting Interview & Interrogation IP3
While conducting Interview & Interrogation IP3, a good detective will carry-out the following procedures, first they will carry out the preparation and planning process, they will later engage and then explain, they will then account for clarification as well as pose some challenges, they will later obtain closure through creation of a good rapport and finally they will ensure that they carry out a thorough evaluation.
In carrying out any interview or rather an interrogation, it is important to note that planning is the most essential component that must first be carried out. Planning ensures that the relevant information in relation to the case is covered. For the interview or the interrogation to be successful, the criminal investigator is involved in the process of obtaining information that the subject matter in this case may not want to supply to the lead investigator concerning their guilt as well as their involvement in that given case. Basically, some of the interviews end up turning into interrogations and mostly when the suspect reveals the information that points towards their guilt. It is also essential to plan for the interview that may turn out to be an interrogation as this will enhance the success of both the interview as well as the interrogation. During the process of planning for both the interview and the interrogation, the likelihood of the interview turning out to be an interrogation should carefully be considered. Firstly, as the criminal investigator, it is important to be able to establish the psychical environment that would be capable of providing security so as to enhance minimal or no interruptions and a place that builds pressure on the suspect causing them to be truthful (Bogner et al 2009).
In some cases, planning sometimes is dependent on the subject matter and especially during the early stages of the interrogation. In this case, the eyewitness identification is thus very essential and it determines the planning and the preparation of the interview as well as the interrogation. However, the detective must investigate and determine whether the eyewitness is reliable or viable. Despite the amount of preparation and the experiences that the detective or the interrogator has, they can only be successful in their interrogation if they are good listeners with good skills to read the nonverbal cues (Bogner et al 2009). In doing this they are able to realize the non verbal and the verbal conducts that are demonstrated by the subject. They are also able to build a rapport with the subject as they identify a common ground with the subject hence enabling them to determine whether they should be interrogated especially when there is no doubts about the subject’s involvement in the case and more facts about the case are continually obtained.
While planning, the detective should also resolve the important details of documenting the subjects’ confession even before conducting the interrogation. As a detective, one should familiarize with the subject’s history and background before conducting the interview. The subject’s personality traits such as emotions, feelings and individual values, influence the success of the interview and the interrogation. Once the investigator is able to obtain this information, they are able to use this information as persuasion strategy unto the subject hence causing them to confess the truth which is in their best benefit. The investigator should as well be able to understand the case facts before undertaking the interrogation or the interview (Swanson & Swanson 2006). Thus they should first obtain the knowledge of the manner in which the crime was committed and thus they increase their credibility rate ad this increases their chances of succeeding in the interrogation process. A separation of time in between the interview and interrogation is quite essential as it allows the detective to have some time to be able to formulate an interrogation mechanism and hence shifting from the non-accusatory strategy and fact-finding interrogation tone to the accusatory process and persuasive interrogation tone. The interrogator may at some cases use his or her absence from the interview or the interrogation room so as to strengthen his confrontation towards the suspect at the beginning of the interrogation.
In conclusion, a detective may have only one chance to carry out a formal interview as well as an interrogation of a suspect. Hence it is important that the detective maximizes the amount of time, resources and information that they have to acquire quality information out of the interview. The case under investigation should be clearly outlined and defined with a series of relevant questions that are prepared earlier in advance. These questions should be asked so as to develop the investigated information and the conduct symptoms of either the truth or deception. Once the relevant information of the investigated issue is drawn out, the detective is supposed to step out of the interview room and should reevaluate and review the notes of the interrogation and any other evidence that has been collected thus coming up with a decision.
References
Swanson, C. R., & Swanson, C. R. (2006). Criminal investigation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Bogner, A., Littig, B., Menz, W., & Palgrave Connect (Online service). (2009). Interviewing experts. Basingstoke [England: Palgrave Macmillan.
