Interrogations and Confessions

Question 1

Police Interview

Answer 1

Goal:
Gain information that furthers investigation
Atmosphere:
Typically cordial, comfortable atmosphere
Target:
Witness and/or person of interest
Assumptions:
None

Question 2

Police Interrogation

Answer 2

Goal:
Obtain a confession
Acquiring info that might help investigation
Atmosphere:
Uncomfortable - physically & psychologically
Target:
Suspect
Assumption:
Guilty knowledge

Question 3

Historical perspective on Interrogations

Answer 3

1900-1980 typically coercive

Replaced by psychological methods-deceit and trickery

Question 4

Good techniques to obtain useful information

Answer 4

Establish rapport with interviewee
Ensure interviewee understands ‘rules’ of interview
Use open-ended questioning
No interviewer bias

Question 5

The Reid Model

Answer 5

It is absurd to believe that a suspect who knows he did not commit a crime would place greater weight and credibility on alleged evidence than his own knowledge of his innocence.
A normal person would not confess to a crime they did not commit and would maintain their innocence.
Anger and mistrust towards the investigator

Question 6

3 Stages of the Reid Model

Answer 6

1. ) Gather evidence
2. )Conduct interview to assess guilt
   - Non-accusatorial
3. )Conduct interrogation to obtain confession
   - Accusatorial
   - 9 steps, many psychological ‘tactics’

Question 7

The Reid Model Step 1

Answer 7

1.) Direct Positive Confrontation
Presentation of fact synopsis to suspect 
Reference to evidence
-Real or fictional
Suspect told that s/he involved in crime
Behavioral observation of suspect
Restatement of confrontation
-Stronger or weaker

Question 8

The Reid Model Step 2

Answer 8

2.) Theme Development
Transition phases from confrontation
Propose reasons that will justify commission of the crime
–Victim asking for it, result unintended
Behavioural assessment of suspect to choose proper theme
Longest portion of 9 steps

Question 9

The Reid Model Step 3

Answer 9

3.) Stopping Denials
Starts during direct positive confrontation
Absence of denials in step 2 indicates probable guilt
–BUT, both guilty and innocent deny crime??
Interrogator recognizes/stops denial
Progress indicated by cessation or weakening of denials

Question 10

The Reid Model Step 4

Answer 10

4.) Overcoming Objections
Suspect proposes a reason why he allegedly did not commit the crime
–Normally offered by guilty person
–Indicates progress if given after denials
Handled differently than denials
–First listening and accepting
Proper handling of objections helps overcome subject’s defences

Question 11

The Reid Model Step 5

Answer 11

5.) Getting the Suspect’s Attention
Suspect is on defensive, tense, confused
Themes work only if suspect is listening
--Verbal techniques to command attention
Sincerity
--Establish understanding & concern
--Physical gestures
--Physical closeness

Question 12

The Reid Model Step 6

Answer 12

6.) The Suspect Quiets and Listens
Physical signs of surrender begin to appear
--Show sympathy, understanding
Urge suspect to come clean
Themes shortened
--Lead toward alternatives
Eye contact
--Most important at this point 
--Verbal and physical techniques
Tears = guilt

Question 13

The Reid Model Step 7

Answer 13

7.) Alternatives, face-saving explanations

Non-threatening to suspect
–Concern some minor aspect of crime

Give choice between acceptable & unacceptable reason

One alternative stressed

• -Lead subject to choose positive alternative
• -Either choice = guilt

Question 14

The Reid Model Step 8

Answer 14

8.) Bringing Suspect into Conversation
Acceptance of one alternative reinforced
Suspect encouraged to talk about aspect of offence
Encourage full confession
Use of realistic words introduced by interrogator
Initial corroboration of confession
Oral witnessing of admissions by 2 persons

Question 15

The Reid Model Step 9

Answer 15

9.) The Confession
Reduction of oral statement into written, typed, or electronically recorded form

Voluntariness of statement established along with corroboration of details

Suspect’s signing of statement is witnessed by 2 or more persons

Question 16

Categorization of strategies in the Reid Model

Answer 16

Minimization techniques:
“Good cop”
Show sympathy, understanding and respect
Good-cop, bad-cop
“People make mistakes”
Offers of sympathy, face-saving excuses, moral justification for the crime
Police not allowed to explicitly offer leniency
–OK if suspect believes confession will result in leniency

Maximization techniques:
“Bad cop”
Exaggerate the seriousness of the crime and charges
Assert firm belief in suspect’s guilt
Includes knowledge-bluff trick

Question 17

Problems with the Reid Model

Answer 17

1.) Detecting deception
–low ability, no improvement with experience
2.) Investigator bias
–begin with initial guilty belief
–unknowingly seek to confirm expectation
–remember the “confirmation bias”?
–impact on interviewee behaviour
defensive, appear guilty – even when innocent
3.)Coercive nature=false confessions

Question 18

Criteria for a voluntary confession

Answer 18

Look for:
Threats/promises?

Oppression?
–Distasteful/inhumane conduct involuntary

Operating mind?
–Sufficiently aware of what (s)he is saying & to whom

Degree of police ‘trickery’?

• -In general, allowed
• -BUT, not “so appalling as to shock the community”

Question 19

Interrogation in Court

Answer 19

North American courts require confessions given:
–By competent person
–Voluntarily actions
Confessions extracted via explicitly coercive tactics are inadmissible;
Confessions resulting from subtle psychological coercion often admitted
R. v. Oickle (2000)

Question 20

PEACE model

Answer 20

Planning and Preparation
Engage and Explain
Account
Closure
Evaluation

Question 21

Pros & Cons of Videotaping Confessions

Answer 21

Benefits:
Protects citizens from coercion
Protects police against false allegations
Allows courts to make more informed decisions
Potential problems:
Videotaping interrogations must be done with caution
Subtle factors influence decisions of guilt or innocence

Question 22

False Confession

Answer 22

When an individual confesses to a crime they did not commit or exaggerates involvement in a crime they did commit

Question 23

Retracted Confession

Answer 23

Confession that confessor later declares to be false

-May or may not have been false confession

Question 24

Disputed Confession

Answer 24

Confession later disputed at trial
–Not necessarily false or retracted
Legal technicality, suspect disputes, etc.

Question 25

3 Types of false confessions

Answer 25

Voluntary False Confessions
Coerced-Compliant False Confessions
Coerced-Internalized False Confessions

Question 26

Voluntary False Confessions

Answer 26

Occurs without being prompted by the police
Can be result of:
desire for notoriety
inability to distinguish fact from fantasy
attempt to protect the real offender
need to be punished
Example: The Lindbergh case

Question 27

Coerced-Compliant False Confessions

Answer 27

Occurs in response to a desire
-To escape further interrogation or to 
-To gain a promised reward
Confessor knows they did not commit the crime
Unlike voluntary false confessions 
-Caused by coercive police tactics
Like voluntary false confessions
-Confessor knows they didn’t do it
**Most common

Question 28

Coerced-Internalized False Confessions

Answer 28

Results from highly suggestive interrogations
–Confessor comes to believe that they did commit the crime (i.e., ‘internalizes’)
Some people more susceptible to this type of confession (Gudjonsson, 1992)
Source monitoring errors
–Do I remember that or did someone tell me that?

Question 29

Risk Factors for False Confessions

Answer 29

Situational & Personal

Question 30

Situational Risk Factors in False Confessions

Answer 30

1.)Custody and isolation
Isolation increased anxiety
–Increases feeling of “I need to get out of here”
Usually involves fatigue & sleep deprivation
–Increase suggestibility
–Impair decision-making
Isolation + physical characteristics of room + pressure to submit to authority
–Highly stressful!

2.)Process of confrontation
General tendency to avoid confrontation
If outcome is inevitable look for shortest path (path of least resistance)
–Despair, learned helplessness, etc.
–Ultimately leads to compliance
False evidence increases likelihood of internalization

3.) Minimization

Question 31

Personal Risk Factors in False Confessions

Answer 31

1.)Personality characteristics
Compliance:
Tendency to go along with authority
Key factor in coerced-compliant confessions
Suggestibility:
Tendency to internalize info
Key factor in coerced-internalized confessions

2.)Intelligence
Mental Retardation:
Tendancy to want to please
Acquiescence bias: Tendency to say “yes”, no matter the question
Impaired ability to see the consequences

3.)Psychopathology
Common symptoms of mental illness-->  increased suggestibility & compliance:
Distorted perceptions & memories
Reality monitoring problems
Impaired judgment
Heightened anxiety
Mood disturbance
Lack of self-control
Inability to anticipate consequences

Question 32

Resisting Interrogative Influences

Answer 32

Ability to resist:
Maintain focus on long-term goals
Not distracted by pleasing interrogator
Control attention
Access long-term memory and integrate new info
Control emotions to use above info
Possess willpower to persist in resistance

Motivation to resist:
Must maintain focus on long-term goals
Not those promoted by the interrogator
Perceived availability, feasibility of alternatives
Know legal rights to stop interrogation, an attorney, avoid self-incrimination
Know you’re innocent and can establish innocence
Need sense of self-efficacy
Interrogation tactics designed to impair motivation
Convince suspect resistance is futile and hurts the suspect’s long-term legal interests
Impairs general motivation through distress or fatigue

Question 33

Fundamental attribution error

Answer 33

Belief actions result from person’s ‘nature’, rather than situation

Neglecting to consider situational influences on behaviour

Interrogation forces represent substantial situational influence