Lecture 3: Police Procedures Flashcards
1
Q
What is a standard police interview?
A
- Ask witnesses to describe, in their own words, what happened
- Who, what, when, where, why
2
Q
Explain the findings of the McLean (1995) study on police interviews and transcripts.
A
Randomly selected 16 tape recording w/ transcriptions of police interviews; found some interesting data:
- 1) 50% of the questions were leading
- 19% of the Qs only allowed yes/no answers
- 2) 50-50 talking time between officer and witness
- Problem: police are an authority figure, meaning if they were talking 50% of the time, they were heavily controlling the interview
- 3) Obstructive style; police constantly interrupted
- Could unconsciously cue to you that you’re wrong/saying something irrelevant when an authority figure interrupts you
- At the least, it disrupts your recall
- 4) Written report highly edited—omission of highly relevant info (on average per tape 14 relevant facts were excluded) + inclusions of contradictory facts (but only 4 across all tapes)
- 5) All 16 transcriptions were signed as true by the witness
3
Q
What is the cognitive interview (enhanced)?
A
- Based on principles of memory storage and retrieval
- Depends on cooperation of witness
Employs 4 retrieval mnemonics designed to improve recall (5 w/ enhanced):
- 1) Rapport building (what distinguishes enhanced from regular)
- 2) Guided imagery—before answering questions, try to place yourself back into the scenario, relive the experience
- Using context + state-dependent memory cues
- 3) Temporal order—recall events in a different temporal order
- False memories have the tendency to become story-like; by telling the event forwards and backwards, we hope to start omitting things that aren’t true
- 4) Report any related matter—”tell us anything else that you remember, even if you don’t think that it’s relevant”
- 5) Recall using different perspectives—can be good, but only if done properly
- High probability of someone filling in their memory w/ things that are plausible/familiar (can lead to creating false memories)
4
Q
Compared to the standard interview, what effects should the cognitive interviews (enhanced) produce?
A
- 1) Be 20-30/70-80 talking time between interviewer and witness
- 2) Be flexible
- 3) Have no interruptions
- 4) Use open-ended questions
- Empirical evidence shows that CI(E) reveals 35% more correct info than standard interviews, w/o increasing the rate of recall for false info
5
Q
What are 7 ways to reduce misidentification in police lineups?
A
- Blind lineup administrators
- Bias reducing instructions
- Unbiased lineups
- Witness confidence ratings
- Video recording
- Sequential lineups
- Expert testimony
6
Q
How can double blind lineup procedures reduce misidentification?
A
- Blind lineup administrators—i.e. unaware of who the suspect is
When interviewers know who the suspect is, they can inadvertently/explicitly cue witnesses
- e.g. “Take your time” to tentative description—might be the nice thing to say, but the witness might interpret it differently
- Subtle unconscious cues (e.g. coughing, voice inflection)
- Confirmation bias—witness is looking to see if they’re correct as well, so police shouldn’t say anything even after they’ve made a decision
- Reinforcement can raise witness confidence levels (witness confidence trumps accuracy)
7
Q
How can bias-reducing instructions to eyewitnesses reduce misidentification?
A
- Mainly: telling them the true criminal might not actually be in the lineup/photo spread
- Also tell them that the person administering the lineup/photo spread doesn’t know who it is → can’t look to others for confirmation
8
Q
How can unbiased lineups reduce misidentification?
A
Unbiased lineups—everyone in the lineup must match the description of the suspect so the perpetrator doesn’t stand out
- fillers: the alternative suspects in the lineup/photo spread
-
Description-matched method: choosing fillers based on the witness’s description of the suspect
- Better b/c it allows for more variability in appearance
- All pictures should be similar—i.e. one shouldn’t be in color, someone shouldn’t be smiling, same size
- Reduce source misattribution (e.g. recognizing a face you saw in another context) + unconscious transference (a kind of source misattribution; taking a familiar face you saw in one context and applying it to a different context)
9
Q
How does taking witness confidence ratings and using video recording influence misidentification?
A
- Confidence ratings: how confident the witness is that the person identified is the right person
- This statement must be taken immediately after the culprit is identified and before any feedback is given to the witness
- Talking to others or having time pass can influence the confidence ratings
- Video recording allows judges + jury to view the identification process
- Videotaped lineup or a written statement (e.g. how confident on a scale of 1-7?)
- Way for lawyers to discredit a witness, if needed
10
Q
How can sequential lineups reduce misidentification?
A
-
Sequential lineups: an eyewitness sees one person (or photograph) at a time, decides whether or not that person was the perpetrator, and then sees the next person
- vs. simultaneous lineups: several people standing side by side—eyewitnesses tend to rely on relative judgments to compare the suspects to their mental image
-
absolute judgment: witness makes the identification on the basis of a match between the lineup member and the witness’s memory of the perpetrator
- Produces better overall accuracy; witnesses tend to be more conservative w/ their decisions
- relative judgment: the witness engages in a comparative process and selects the member who most resembles the perpetrator
11
Q
How can expert testimony reduce misidentification?
A
- Expert testimony—resistance to psychologist testimonies in Canada; not seen as delivering info beyond that of common sense/experience
- But studies show that expert testimonies do make jurors more sensitive to potential biases + the average person doesn’t know that much about eyewitnesses in comparison to what experts can provide
12
Q
What are blank lineups and what are the problems with them?
A
- Was the original solution to simultaneous lineups (before sequential), but doesn’t really work
- First line up: suspect not in it—they’re not supposed to pick anyone, but they probably will anyways
- Second line up: actual suspect is in it—witnesses pretty good at picking the correct suspect
- Removes relative decisions, but having them make a guess the first time influences how a jury + lawyers view their decision the 2nd time (how do we know it wasn’t a guess?)
13
Q
What is a cold mugshot search and how is it used?
A
Cold mugshot search: giving the witness a book of mugshots of convicted criminals and getting them to look through until they can identify someone
- Relative judgement effects, you know they’re a criminal anyways, you feel compelled to pick one (even if they’re not in the array)
- If a suspect is in a lineup, their lawyer is supposed to be there—you can’t get the lawyer for all of these people
14
Q
What is the walkthrough procedure and what are the problems with it?
A
- Also called the “Oklahoma lineup”—taking the witness to somewhere the police think the suspect is in
- Same problem w/ biased lineups: witness already has an expectation the suspect will be there + use relative comparisons
15
Q
How and what composite sketch softwares are used?
A
- Identi-Kit: describing the suspect’s face + selecting it in a program, which will add a sketched version of facial features onto a face template
- Photo-Fit: does the same thing using actual photos
- FACES + Photoshop (often used to add color): does the same thing w/ computer-generated faces
16
Q
When are interrogations used?
A
- Suspects aren’t usually interrogated right away—many suspects are interviewed until they get a few convincing suspects + interrogate them
- 80% of criminal cases solved by confession
- Suspects often told that if they don’t confess + go to trial, they’ll get a heavier/stricter sentence
- What they aren’t told is that if they go to trial and there’s no good evidence against you, you’ll get 0 years
17
Q
What is the impact of confessions on trials?
A
- “An admission of guilt is the most damaging evidence that can be presented at a defendant’s trial” (R. Hodgson, S.C.C.)
- With eyewitness testimony coming in 2nd
18
Q
What is the fundamental attribution error and how does it relate to confessions?
A
-
fundamental attribution error: the tendency to attribute other people’s behaviour to dispositional causes (traits, personality) and to dismiss the situational pressures acting on the person
- → “in the case of confession evidence, we tend to discount the pressures of the interrogation process as a cause of a suspect’s confession”
- Most of us assume that people wouldn’t confess to a crime b/c we wouldn’t confess to a crime under normal circumstances
- So if someone confesses and recants, people assume it’s b/c you’re guilty
19
Q
What factors would render a confession inadmissible in a trial, and what are 6 criteria used to judge this?
A
- In Canada, a confession must be 1) backed up by some other form of evidence
- 2) R. v. Oickle (2000) – “a confession will not be admissible if it is made under circumstances that raise a reasonable doubt as to voluntariness”
Confessions are excluded if they are elicited by:
- Brute force
- Prolonged isolation
- But how do you define prolonged isolation?
- Deprivation of food or sleep
- Difference between depriving them of food before/after they already ate—again, what counts?
- Threats of harm or punishment (even hypothetical)
- Promises of immunity or leniency
- The Crown/prosecution can do this b/c they actually have the power to control this, but the police don’t
- Not notifying suspect of their constitutional rights (s. 10, C.C.R.F.)
20
Q
What is investigator bias and what are the impacts of it?
A
- investigator bias: Bias that can result when police officers enter an interrogation setting already believing that the suspect is guilty
- Guilty expectations lead to:
- More suspects judged to be guilty,
- More pressure exerted on innocent subjects,
- Innocent subjects were seen as much more defensive (Kassin et al., 2003),
- Seem to confirmation the guilt
- All examples of confirmation bias
21
Q
What is the PEACE Model of interrogations?
A
- NA often uses the Reid Technique, vs. England which uses the PEACE model
- Inquisitorial vs. accusatorial—conversation management and information gathering
- Videotaping of interrogations
- Essentially the Cognitive Interview (Enhanced)
Planning and preparation—Plan the interview + involve prosecution evidence
- Have enough evidence to call a suspect in but aren’t going to tell them what evidence you have
- Let suspect talk for 70-80% of the time + ask some Qs related to the evidence
- Try to gather info about things that aren’t clear from the witness testimony
- Want to gather points that prove the offence + negate defenses
- But should also gather info about alibis
Engage and explain (essentially rapport building)—Interview preamble
- Engage: establish rapport with suspect and introduce circumstance
- Explain: outline the reasons for the interview, read suspect their rights
Account—Interviewee’s recollection of events
- Allow the suspect to give his or her version without interruption by the officer
- Problem w/ this? It’s not actually a problem
- We want them to lie/contradict themselves, etc.
- We’ll be able to tell by comparing to our existing evidence
- Also, usually only guilty people lie
Closure—To maintain interviewer-interviewee relationship
- Thanks, clarify understanding, questions
Evaluation—Evaluate interview
- Make sures objective were met
- If needed, create new interview based on evaluation
- Use to improve technique for next time
22
Q
What are 4 other interrogation techniques often used?
A
- Good Cop/Bad Cop—often not actually 2 different cops but 1 person, using a mixture of the soft sell vs. scare tactics
- Minimization techniques (soft sell)—false sense of security; e.g. sympathy, excuses
- Maximization techniques (scare tactics)—intimidation; e.g. exaggerate seriousness, lie about evidence
-
Rapport building—flattery, offer a drink, be your friend, show respect
- Not like the PEACE technique to make you comfortable, but trying to suck up to the person
23
Q
How is the environment manipulated for an interrogation?
A
- Sound proof and visually isolated to promote a low internal locus of control and the feeling of withdrawn isolation
- Bare, no ornamentation, two chairs and a desk
- No outside communication
- Sit close in armless straight-backed chairs at equal eye level
24
Q
What are the 3 steps in the Reid Model of interrogations?
A
Step 1) Gather evidence related to crime and interview witnesses and victims
- Factual analysis: Eliminate improbable suspects + develop possible suspects or leads
- Increase confidence in identifying truthful or guilty suspects through the interview process
- Identify proper interrogation strategies
Step 2) Conduct a non-accusatorial interview of the suspect (evidence of deception)
- Behaviour analysis interview: witnesses, victims, and suspect
- Behaviour provoking—e.g. see how they respond to God, talking about their mother, etc.
- Often used later on in the soft sell vs. scare tactic (“did you do this b/c you made a mistake or b/c you’re a terrible person + want to go to hell?”)
Step 3) Conduct an accusatorial interrogation of the suspect (9-step procedure, this stage is the actual Reid Technique)
- Based on 4 main concepts: 1) loss of control, 2) active persuasion by moral justification, 3) discourages denials, 4) progresses towards an admission of guilt
- May use evidence ploys to aid w/ this—e.g. lying about witnesses/evidence being present, offering rewards for confession
25
What are some **problems** with the Reid Model?
* Detecting deception is extremely difficult and often inaccurate
* Investigator bias – confirmation bias
* False confessions
26
What is an **instrumental-coerced** (or coerced-compliant) false confession?
* **instrumental-coerced false confessions**: when, as a result of a long or intense interrogation, suspects confess to crimes they know they did not commit
* Most common type of false confession; usually believe confessing will result in a more lenient sentence/getting out of the situation + they’ll be able to “straighten everything out later”
27
What is an **instrumental-voluntary** false confession?
* **instrumental-voluntary false confessions**: when suspects knowingly implicate themselves in crimes they did not commit in an effort to achieve some goal
* e.g. Protect someone else, gain fame, etc.
* Often found amongst gangs or sometimes even to form an alibi for committing an even worse crime
28
What is an **authentic-coerced** (or coerced-internalized) false confession?
* **authentic-coerced false confession**: when, as a product of a long or intense interrogation, suspects become convinced—at least temporarily—that they may have actually committed the crime; usually from creation of false memories
* Some don’t gain false memories but instead believe they committed the crime w/ no memory of doing so
29
Who is **susceptible** to making a **coerced-internalized** false confession?
Different factors influencing who’s susceptible to falling for this:
* 1) History of substance abuse or interference with brain function
* Usually demonstrate lack of details about the crime
* 2) Inability to detect discrepancies between what was observed and what was suggested
* 3) Mental state factors: severe anxiety, confusion and shock, feelings of guilt (survivor’s guilt)
* 4) **Compliance**—The Gudjonsson Compliance Scale; 2 dimensions of compliance:
* 1) Eagerness to please others
* 2) Desire to avoid conflict and confrontation
* Some evidence suggests you can reliably differentiate between “resisters” and “false confessors”
30
Explain the study behind the **Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scale**.
* Ps become familiar w/ short story → then answer 20 questions, 15 misleading (i.e. they’re incorrect)
* e.g. In the story a guy turns left but the person asks “did the guy turn right?”
* Yield – susceptibility to give in to leading questions
* Shift – the tendency to alter answers when put under pressure by an interviewer
* Some people would just yield (say yes) b/c they remember turning but become unsure of the direction
* See how many answers you yield to, then yell at you then see how many you change (shift)
* e.g. If you say, “I’m pretty sure the guy turned left,” they then put pressure on you to see if you shift
* As anxiety increases + IQ decreases – suggestibility increases
31
Explain the **Kassin & Sukel (1997)** study on the **impact of false confessions**.
* Ps read 1/3 versions of a trial + come up w/ a verdict
* The case consisted of an introduced confession w/ 4 conditions + a control:
* 1) Elicited under low or high pressure interrogation
* 2) Ruled admissible or inadmissible by a judge
* 3) Control group with no confession
* Hypothetical-ideal results:
* Low pressure, admissible: 65% guilty
* Low pressure, not admissible + high pressure admissible/not admissible: 20%
* Control group: 20% guilty
* High pressure, admissible is what we’re interested in (should theoretically be the same guilty rate as the control group)
* When asked about the case, jurors saw the high pressure confessions as:
* Less voluntary
* Correctly recalled the judge’s ruling
* And reported it had less influence on their decisions
* But what did their results show?
* Low pressure, admissible: 65%
* Low pressure, inadmissible: 50%
* High pressure, admissible: 50%
* High pressure, inadmissible: 45%
* Result: Confession increased the guilty rates
* Even when it was coerced
* Even when it was stricken from the record
* Even when jurors said it had to influence
32
How well are the rights of suspects understood?
* Many studies involving university students demonstrate that a majority of people don’t understand more than a quarter of the info when police delivery suspect rights
* It doesn’t improve dramatically even when their rights are written down
* It’s worrying that high-educated individuals have trouble understanding these rights—we can only imagine how this is further impaired in a stressful setting (actual arrest)
* Studies show that explaining these rights dramatically increases comprehension (vs. both giving instructions or simply listing all the rights)
* Despite their low understanding, many studies also show that individuals are very confident
33
Should interrogators be allowed to lie?
* “Police in Canada and the United States are legally permitted to use false evidence ploys to induce a suspect to confess”
* But there are 2 primary concerns:
* (1) “may undermine public confidence in the police and reduce the willingness of citizens to cooperate with law enforcement”
* (2) Removing inhibitions to lie during interrogation may lead to lying in a courtroom as well, if it means securing a conviction
34
What are **3 benefits** of and **3 problems** with recording police interrogations?
Benefits:
* “(1) It provides a means by which **courts can monitor** interrogation practices and thereby enforce safeguards are being followed.
* (2) It **deters the police** from employing interrogation methods likely to lead to untrustworthy confessions.
* (3) It enables courts to make **more informed judgments** about whether interrogation practices were likely to lead to an untrustworthy confession”
Concerns:
* (1) **psychological impact** on the viewers
* (2) the clips shown are **highly selective** + not necessarily representative of the entire interrogation process
* (3) potential bias of camera angle; the **equal-focus camera perspective** showing both the suspect and the interrogator best enables jurors to assess the voluntariness of the confession and the coerciveness of the interrogation
