One aspect of the Reid approach is to train investigators to discern when a suspect is lying e. Critics question whether training can actually lead investigators to do so, and point to. For example, one frequent critic of the Reid Technique, law professor Richard Leo, argues that extensive social science research has demonstrated:. For example, the studies may have 1 involved college students in laboratory settings, with students having low motivation to be believed if innocent or avoid detection if lying, or 2 been conducted by people not trained to interview criminal suspects.
The company also points to other studies supporting the contention that training can increase the ability of police to detect when suspects are lying. Critics argue that various features of the Reid interrogation method may lead certain innocent suspects to confess. According to some critics of the Reid Technique, aspects of Reid-style interrogation that may lead to false confessions include 1 misclassification the police attributing deception to truthful suspects ; 2 coercion including psychological manipulation ; and 3 contamination such as when police present non-public information to a suspect, and the suspect incorporates that information in his or her confession Gudjonsson , , discussing Leo and Drizin among other studies.
They argue that:. False confessions are not caused by the application of the Reid Technique. The company also cites court cases upholding their methods or denying the admission of expert testimony that would link those methods to false confessions e. Jacques , F. In England, police generally use a less confrontational interview and interrogation method than is used in the United States.
Under the PEACE method, investigators allow a suspect to tell his or her story without interruption, before presenting the suspect with any inconsistencies or contradictions between the story and other evidence. Investigators are prohibited from deceiving suspects during an interview Meissner et al. For more detailed information, see their website. Preparation and Planning. Interviewers should create a written interview plan, focusing on issues such as the objectives of the interview and the order of interviews.
Among other things, the plan should include the time a suspect has been in custody, the topics to be covered, and points necessary to prove the offense or provide a defense. Interviewers should consider characteristics of the interviewee that could be relevant to the plan e. Interviewers may need to consider practical arrangements, such as visiting the scene or the location of the interview. Engage and Explain. The interviewers should engage the individual, including using active listening to establish a rapport with him or her.
The interviewers should explain the reasons for the interview and its objectives. They should also explain routines and expectations of the process e. Interviewers should encourage the individual to state anything they believe is relevant.
Psychological research shows that juvenile defendants and those with low mental capacity are most likely to make false confessions and that, counter-intuitively, innocent suspects may be more likely than the guilty to confess falsely in the mistaken belief that they can confess, end the interrogation, and then resolve everything somehow later.
Regular voice recordings of entire police interrogations have reduced the numbers of false confessions in jurisdictions that have adopted this reform practice. Some words to the wise: If accused of, charged with, or questioned about a crime, make no statement to the police without a lawyer present. The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. We invite you to contact us and welcome your calls, letters and electronic mail.
Contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship has been established. Get a Case Evaluation Email. Click for Navigation.
What should I expect during a police interrogation? The Reid Technique When police officers suspect someone of a crime, they often use the Reid interrogation technique first developed in the s. Using this technique, police rely on three methods to lead suspects to believe that confessing to crimes, whether guilty of them or not, is in their best interests: Isolation.
Some experienced criminals or persons who have committed well-planned crimes believe that they can offer an alternate explanation for their involvement in the criminal event that will exonerate them as a suspect.
An investigator may draw answers from this type of suspect by offering the same proposition that is offered for exoneration. This is the opportunity for a suspect to offer an alibi or a denial of the crime and an alternate explanation or exonerating evidence.
It can be very difficult for a suspect to properly explain away all the evidence. Looking at the progression of the event, an interrogator can sometimes ask for additional details that the suspect cannot explain. The truth is easier to tell because it happened, and the facts will line up. In contrast, a lie frequently requires additional lies to support the untrue statement. Examining a statement that is believed to be untrue, an interrogator can sometimes ask questions that expose the lies behind the original lie.
This is particularly true of persons who are first-time offenders and particularly young offenders who have committed a crime against a person. Observing the suspect during this progression, a suspect affected by guilt will sometimes exhibit body language or facial expressions of concern or remorse.
Responses, such as shoulders slumping, head hung down, eyes tearing up, or avoiding eye contact, can indicate the suspect is ashamed and regretful of the crime. Observing this type of response, an investigator may move to a theme of conversation that offers the suspect the opportunity to clear their conscience by taking responsibility for their actions and apologizing or by taking some other action to right the wrong that has been done.
Suspects who have been arrested will sometimes be willing to provide an additional explanation of their involvement or the events to reduce their level of culpability or blame for the crime. In cases where multiple suspects have been arrested for a crime, one of those suspects may wish to characterize their own involvement as peripheral, sometimes as being before the fact or after the fact involvement.
Examples of this would be a person who left the door unlocked for a break-in to take place or merely driving the getaway car. These less involved suspects hope to gain a reduced charge or even be reclassification as a witness against their co-accused. The arrested suspect in a criminal investigation waiting in custody for interrogation has plenty to think about.
Even the most experienced criminals will be concerned about how much evidence the police have for proving their connection to the crime. In the process of presenting a suspect with the opportunity to address the evidence that has been collected, an additional strategy can sometimes be engaged where there is a large volume of incriminating evidence or undeniable direct evidence, such as eyewitnesses or strong forensic evidence for circumstantial connections of the suspect to the crime.
In such cases, if the interrogator can reveal the evidence in detail to the suspect, this disclosure may result in the suspect losing hope and making a confession to the crime. Although this tendency to surrender to overwhelming evidence may seem illogical, it does happen. Sometimes, this surrender has more to do with conscience and shame of the crime, but other times, the offender has just lost the energy to resist what they perceive to be a hopeless fight.
More recent research has shown that the stronger the evidence, the more likely a suspect was to confess Gudjonsson, As noted at the beginning of this chapter, the goal of ethical interviewing, questioning, and interrogation is to elicit the truth, and the truth can include statements that are either inculpatory confessions of guilt or exculpatory denial of involvement in a crime. Whenever an investigator has interrogated a suspect, and a confession of guilt has been obtained, that investigator needs to take some additional steps to ensure that the confession can be verified as truthful before it goes to court.
These additional steps are required because, although the investigator has not used any illegal or unethical techniques, the court will still consider whether the accused, for some reason, has confessed to a crime they did not commit. A skilled defence lawyer will often present arguments alleging that psychological stresses of guilt or hopelessness from exposure to overwhelming evidence have been used to persuade a suspect to confess to a crime they did not commit.
In such cases, it is helpful for the court to hear any additional statements made by the accused, such as those that reveal that the suspect had direct knowledge of the criminal event that could only be known to the criminal responsible.
In police investigations, there are many details of the criminal event that will be known to the police through their examination of the crime scene or through the interview with witnesses or victims. Confessing to the crime is one thing, but confessing to the crime and revealing intimate details is much more compelling to the court.
Regardless of the effort and care that investigators take to not end up with a false confession, they still occur, and there are some more common scenarios where false confessions happen. It is important for an investigator to consider these possibilities when a confession is obtained.
These situations are:. Over the past century, with the Juvenile Delinquents Act , the Young Offenders Act , and the Youth Criminal Justice Act , there has been an increased recognition in Canada of the need to treat young offenders differently than their adult counterparts.
Recognizing the special needs of youth, each of these acts moved to treat young offenders less punitively and with a greater attention to rehabilitation. Further, under the Youth Criminal Justice Act YCJA , young offenders are regarded as a special category of suspect, and some very strict rules apply to the process of arresting, questioning, or interrogating a young offender.
For instance, the YCJA requires the notification and inclusion of parents or guardians in situations where a youth is being subjected to action for an investigation or a charge for an offence. As well, any young persons must have their Charter Rights explained by the investigator with language appropriate to their age and level of understanding. This means that the officer must talk with and assess an accused youth to determine their ability to understand their rights before taking their statement.
During this examination, the court will determine from the evidence whether the youth fully understood the rights being explained to them.
Good evidence of understanding can be achieved by asking the youth to repeat, summarize, or paraphrase their understanding of the rights that were explained to them. In addition to the right to instruct counsel, as afforded to any adult under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms , a youth must also be afforded the additional right of being given a reasonable opportunity to consult with a parent or, in the absence of a parent, an adult relative or any other appropriate adult chosen by the young person, as long as that person is not a co-accused or under investigation for the same offence.
Further, in addition to this right, there is also an obligation on the police investigator to provide independent notice to the parent of a detained young person as soon as possible. The requirement for notice to the parent is a separate obligation for police, and it requires specific notification of a the name of the young person, b the charge against the young person, and c a statement that the young person has the right to be represented by counsel.
Tactics Police Use to Get a Confession. Learn about the various techniques used by police officers to get a confession. The Reid Technique When police officers suspect a person of a crime, they often use the Reid interrogation technique, first developed in the s.
Under this technique, police rely on three concepts that are intended to lead the suspect to believe that confessing to the crime whether guilty or not is in the suspect's best interests: Isolation. Officers isolate the suspect from family and friends, in the hopes that it will make the person feel alone. The reliance on isolation led to the development of the modern, windowless interrogation room.
The officer starts out by stating that the suspect is guilty. The officer knows it and the defendant knows it. The officer will then present a theory of the crime sometimes supported by other evidence, sometimes completely fabricated that offers details that the suspect can later parrot back to the officer.
The officer ignores or refutes any claims of innocence by the defendant. This is the "bad cop" portion of the interview. The cop knows that suspect is lying, knows that the suspect did it, and the suspect is wasting everyone's time with protests of innocence. Finally, after the officer had made it clear to the suspect that no claims of innocence will be entertained, the officer moves on to the "good cop" portion of the interview.
Now, the police officer tells the suspect that the officer understands why the suspect did it and everyone else will understand too. Won't the suspect feel better after confessing?
If the suspect confesses, good things will happen — a lesser charge, a chance to go home.
0コメント