Police Interview: Investigative Interviews And Bias

In the Criminal Justice system, the main goal is justice or in other words, a fair consequence to match a criminal action. An obvious, yet unmentioned underlying goal is to prevent injustice. Many times, justice prevails, and this is why our system prevails today. However, when justice fails, it is key to look at the information offered in order to better the system and to repay those that have been failed by it. One area that has shown itself as flawed is the area of interrogations though many other areas will be presented throughout this paper as well. By examining five cases involving questionable interrogation and showing other system flaws, I will enlighten others as to how our justice system handles its flaws, and hopefully I will

Many of today’s interrogation models being utilized in police investigations have an impact on false confessions. The model that has been in the public eye recently is the social psychological process model of interrogation known as the “The Reid Technique.” There are two alternatives used by the police today to replace the Reid Technique, one is the PEACE Model and the other is Cognitive Interviewing. These methods are not interrogation techniques like Reid but interview processes.

In order to comprehend the contribution of psychology to areas of criminal investigation it is important to evaluate research into two of the following areas of criminal investigation: eye witness testimony and offender profiling as well as assess the implications of the findings in the area of criminal investigation. In addition, this essay, with reference to relevant psychological research, discuss how the characteristics of the defendant may influence jury behaviour as well as analyse two psychological influences on the decision making process of juries. In order to improve the efficiency of detection and successful prosecution of crime it is important to underline that in a previous administration, detection of serious crime was poor and eyewitness testimony appeared very unreliable, partly due to standard interview techniques yielding confusing results. It is therefore this essays primary focus is to provide the chief constable with a report explaining how psychologists might be able to improve this situation with a full evaluation of process and evidence.

Renegotiation of reality occurs when, by virtue of the institutionalized process of police interrogations, the suspect perceives that his initial reality holds no value to the interrogator or to the outcome of the interrogation, when he lacks agency to defend his reality, and when there is no other option. In this paper, I will illustrate how each of these factors facilitates false confessions and will use the Norfolk Four case as my vehicle for exploration and analysis.

Information is the lifeblood of a criminal investigation. The ability of investigators to obtain useful and accurate information from eyewitnesses of crimes is crucial to effective law enforcement, yet full and accurate recall is difficult to achieve (Stewart, 1985). Such elicitation of complete and accurate recall from people is important in many aspects of life; specifically, eyewitness recall may determine whether a case is solved. Principle advocates of the cognitive interview (Fisher, Geiselman, Holland & MacKinnon,

When questioning witnesses of a crime, detectives may choose a specific technique; one technique is the Reid Technique. The Reid Technique is a multi-step questioning method that pressures the witnesses or the accused to admit to the crime. It is used in North America. According to Professor Brent Snook, a psychologist at the Memorial University in Newfoundland, the Reid Technique is “Starsky and Hutch”, where two hot head detectives “beat up” their suspects to encourage them confess (http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/11/25/youre-guilty-now-confess-false-admissions-put-polices-favourite-interrogation-tactic-under-scrutiny/). This paper will examine the steps of the Reid Technique, as well as reveal substantial evidence that this technique should be banned. This technique has led to false confessions. Not only does this mean that someone has been punished that isn’t guilty, but it also means the real criminal has not been found and punished. The arguments against the use of this technique are the following:

This particular study is captivating because it narrows down the causes of wrongful convictions of innocent people, whether it’s the interrogators applying inappropriate methods of the Reid Technique, such as misclassification, coercion, psychological manipulation, and contamination. (Orlando) “The Reid Technique of interrogation consists of essentially three steps. Custody and isolation (i.e., the suspect is detained and isolated, anxiety and uncertainty are generated in order to weaken resistance). Confrontation (i.e., the suspect 's guilt is assumed and he or she is confronted with alleged incriminating evidence that may or may not be genuine; denials are rejected, even if they happen to be true, and the consequence of continued denial is emphasized), and minimization (i.e., the interrogator tries to gain the suspect 's trust and provides face-saving excuses for the crime, including suggesting that it was an accident or that the victim deserved it) (…) During the interrogation the investigators use tactics of imbedding trust to lure detainees to comply and achieve a legal outcome which could lead to reducing longer sentencing if the detainee confesses. Also if there are multiple co-perpetrators investigators look to probe the detainee that someone has cast blame on the individual, so therefore they must engage with the police and own up to their part in the crime (Douglas & Rita). The Reid Technique not only is it used illegitimately but it placing innocent individuals

Psychological profiling is defined as a process of linking an offender’s actions at the crime scene to their most likely characteristics to help police investigators narrow down and prioritize a pool of most likely suspects (Psychological Profiling, n.d.). The psychological profiling of offenders has three goals; to provide the criminal justice system with a social and psychological assessment of the offender, to provide the criminal justice system with a psychological evaluation of belongings found in the possession of the offender, and to provide interviewing suggestions and strategies (Holmes & Holmes, 2009). Profiling of suspects can be tracked as far back to the 1880’s. However, it wasn’t until the twentieth century that forensic psychology

Assessment psychology has examined individuals who are criminal offenders who were evaluated to determine their personalities to which they have a long history with. Approximately well over a century ago, Münsterberg, 1908, Vaccaro & Hogan, 2004 who are all psychologists has managed a improved study on criminal offenders that will allow us all to have an ambiguous understanding of how the process of his research in reference to the criminal offenders testimony in court cases. In the 20th century the personality assessment was established, which was generally exercised to govern a component for personality in criminals (Symonds, 1934). During court cases in 1942 adults and juveniles were introduced to the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) which was disclosed that same year. Psychologists Archer, Stredny, & Zoby, (2006); Archer, Buffington-Vollum, Stredny, and Handel (2006); Borum and Grisso (1995); and Lally (2003) was flabbergasted to find how accurate the MMPI–2 presented itself, which was ultimately the most universally piece of equipment acknowledged and used as evidence for criminals, that calculated their personalities in forensic assessments. The MMPI was authenticated well in the 70’s which everyone employed extensively as solid foundation in correctional settings as well as the use in forensic psychologists.

In our current criminal justice system self justification and cognitive dissonance play a major role in why so many innocent people are sentenced to numerous years in prison. Cognitive dissonance and self justification alter interrogators attitudes towards certain suspects due to the practice of a technique known as the ¨Reid technique¨. Usage of this technique is controversial, the technique is based off of “natural human reaction” stating that the natural reaction is anger and mistrust. When confronted by a police officer or a detective, innocent suspects are

The process of inferring the personality characteristics of individuals responsible for committing criminal acts has commonly been referred to as criminal profiling. (Turvey) Criminal profiling can also be referred to as, behavioral profiling because when a profiler creates a profile they refer to the behavior of the offender. The general term criminal profiling can also be referred to as crime scene profiling, criminal personality profiling, offender profiling, psychological profiling and criminal investigative analysis. All the terms listed above are used inconsistently and interchangeably. Modern criminal profiling is owing to a diverse history grounded in the study of criminal behavior (criminology), the study of mental illness

This paper discusses the different roles that are taken on by a forensic psychologist, and how those roles interact and affect each other and how the psychologist is about to do his/her job. It looks briefly at the history of the field. We discuss the forensic psychologist as the consultant, the therapist, the researcher, as well as the expert witness. This paper also discusses predicting dangerousness and whether or not an expert can predict dangerousness. Finally we look at conflicting roles and ethics in the field.

In law, law enforcement relies on a variety of approaches to solving crimes. One method of doing so, is criminal profiling. Police use criminal profiling as an aid to identify the typology of individuals most likely to fit the suspect profile. In this approach, evidence of a crime is used to identify the characteristics of the criminal in relation to their personality and psychological state of mind. As well as demographic variables, such as age, race or geographic location, Investigators might use profiling to narrow down a field of suspects or figure out how to interrogate a suspect already in custody (Criminal profiling: the reality behind the myth (Winerman, L.2004). As the use of criminal profiling increases, empirical questions concerning its validity, reliability, and legal questions regarding its acceptability arise (Pinizzato, A.& Finkel, N.1990). In a survey conducted, several psychologist and psychiatrist were asked about their views towards the validity of criminal profiling. The results of this survey found that only ten percent of psychologist and psychiatrist surveyed reported having any profiling experience and twenty five percent, considered themselves knowledgeable about profiling (Greene, E., & Heilbrun, K. 2014, p.148). Fewer than twenty-five percent of the individuals surveyed, believe that criminal profiling was scientifically reliable or valid (Greene, E., &

The psychologist contributes to investigations criminal behavior by profiling and similar techniques. The criminal psychologist can also assist with pretrial methods. This subsection is highly important because it includes the evaluation and treatment of suspects, victims, or witnesses of a crime. The primary task of the forensic psychologist profiling. Psychological profiling involves “investigating an offender's behavior, motives and background in an attempt to further guide an investigation…,” (APA). There are several different areas of profiling that the professionals do in the field. In criminal profiling the psychologist analyzes the emotional, mental disposition of a suspect. While remaining as a slightly controversial technique, profiling has become an increasingly prominent part of criminal investigation. When used properly it has the capacity of being one of law enforcement’s most powerful tools.

One of the best training programs to implement into the police department is the Reid interrogation techniques. Interrogation and interviewing techniques became popular in 1947 by John E. Reid and Associates. Joseph P. Buckley stated that “The Reid Technique of Interviewing and Interrogation is now the most widely used approach to question subjects in the world (Buckley P. J., 2000).” There three- parts to the Reid process for solving a crime. The first stage that should be taking is to collect and analyze relative information from the crime scene thing that offers insight to the possible suspect and determine the direction an investigation should take. The second stage of the process interviewing people of interest using Behavior Analysis Interview (BAI) (Buckley P. J., 2000). The Behavior Analysis Interview is a non-accusatory process that allows detectives to interview a suspect using a question and answer procedure to provoke a suspect to show non- verbal truthfulness or deception. The third stage, if the offender has not admitted to the crime an accusatory interrogation is administered (Leave no marks, 2007). The Reid interrogation technique is believed to be a fail proof technique ,however, there are some reservations against using this technique on juvenile offenders (Constitutional Law(n.d). Implementing the Reid technique into the police departments learning curriculum will truly