*SWAT MAGAZINE ISSUE ELEVEN: NOVEMBER 1998* ********************************************************************** | .Police interogation techniques. | | Presented By -=The Firestarter=- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (Taken from the book of forbidden knowedge) (A ran it through word scan so if some words seen a little odd just correct them.) Police interrogation is a subject most of us would 'not want to need to know about'. However, if you do ever find yourself in a dark, damp room with a single light bulb hanging from the ceiling, an antiquated tape recorder purring away, and few uniformed chaps around you who you wouldn't exactly call your mates, you might find this interesting. The following text details police interrogation techniques largely from the interrogator's point of view. This way, a better understanding of the psychology of police interrogation (what the interrogators are thinking) is achieved. Police investigators depend on interrogation as a principal means of determining facts and resolving issues. Reliance on interrogation, however, involves certain problems; ascertaining when a suspect or witness is telling the truth, evaluating memory, allowing for the physical and mental condi6on of a witness or suspect, and understanding the problems created by the individual's perspective. Interrogation methods and equipment have evolved in response to these problem areas. The psychological, psychophysical, and physical sciences have all played vital roles in police interrogation techniques. The polygraph or lie detector is used in some countries but its use is still controversial among psychologists and not always judicially acceptable. Some people proclaim methods of producing a false negative through control of their heartbeat, blood pressure and respiration. Certainly, if a mock interrogation is carried out time and time again, the body's physical responses to telling lies become increasingly difficult to detect. Why Suspects Confess Many criminal cases, even when investigated by the most experienced and best-qualified investigators, are ultimately solved by an admission or confession from the person responsible for committing the crime. Often, investigators are able to secure only a minimal amount of evidence, be it physical or circumstantial, that points to a suspect. In many instances this evidence is not considered strong enough by prosecutors to obtain a conviction. In such cases the interrogation of the suspects and their subsequent confessions are of prime importance. This topic addresses the question of why suspects speak freely to investigators, and ultimately, sign full confessions. The physical and psychological aspects of confessions and how they relate to the successful interrogation of suspects is also discussed. Also addressed is the moment of 'breakthrough'; the point in the interrogation when suspects make an admission, no matter how minuscule, that begins the process of obtaining a full confession. Defining Interrogation Interrogation is the questioning of a person suspected of having committed a crime. It is designed to match acquired information to a particular suspect in order to secure a confession. The goals of interrogation include: · To obtain an admission of guilt from the suspect · To gather information that enables investigators to arrive at logical conclusions and thus prove guilt · To provide information for use by the prosecutor in possible court action · To obtain all the facts to determine the method of operation and the circumstances (how it happened) of the crime in question On knowing the definition and objectives of the interrogation, the question arises; 'Why do suspects confess?'. Selfcondemnation and verbal self-destruction are not normal human behavioral characteristics. People do not ordinarily utter unsolicited, spontaneous confessions. It is logical to assume that when suspects are taken to police stations to be questioned concerning their involvement in a particular crime, their immediate reaction will be a refusal to answer any questions. With the deluge of television programs that present a clear picture of the miranda warning (Anything you say... etc.) and its application to suspects, one would conclude that no one questioned about a crime would surrender incriminating information, much less supply investigators with a fully signed confession. It would also seem that once suspects sense the direction in which the investigators are heading, the conversation would immediately end. However, for various psychological reasons, suspects continue to speak with investigators. Suspect Paranoia Suspects are never quite sure of exactly what information investigators possess. They know that the police are investigating the crime, and in many cases, suspects have followed media accounts of their crimes to determine what leads the police have. Uppermost in their minds, however, is how to escape detection and obtain firsthand information about the investigation and where it is heading. Such 'paranoia' motivates suspects to accompany the police voluntarily for questioning. Coupled with curiosity, this paranoia motivates suspects to appear at police headquarters as ‘concerned citizens' who have information pertinent to the case. By doing this, suspects may attempt to supply false or non-corroborative information in order to lead investigators astray, gain inside information concerning the case from investigators, and remove suspicion from themselves by offering information on the case so investigators will not suspect their involvement. For example, in one case a twenty-two year old woman was discovered dead in a stairwell outside a public building. The woman had been raped and was found naked and bludgeoned. Investigators interviewed numerous people during the next few days but were unable to identify any suspects. Media coverage on the case was extremely high. Several days into the investigation a twenty-three year old man appeared at the local police station, with two infants in tow, and informed investigators that he believed he may have some information regarding the woman's death. The man revealed that when he was walking home late one evening, he passed the area where the woman was found and observed a 'strange individual' lurking near a nearby phone booth. The man said that because he was frightened of the stranger, he walked straight back to his home. After reading media accounts of the girl's death, he believed that he should tell the police what he had observed. The man gave police a physical description of the 'stranger' and then helped an artist to compose a sketch of the individual. After he left, investigators discovered that the sketch bore a strong resemblance to the 'witness' who provided the information. After further investigation, the witness was asked to return to the police station to answer more questions, which he did gladly. Some 15 hours into the interrogation, he confessed to one of his 'multiple personalities' having killed the woman, who was unknown to him. He had killed her simply because she was a woman, which is what the suspect had always wanted to be. This case clearly illustrates the need for some suspects (mentally disturbed or not) to know exactly what is happening in an investigation. In their minds, they honestly believe that by hiding behind the guise of a person trying to help they will, without incriminating themselves, learn more about the case from the investigators. The Interrogation Setting In any discussion concerning interrogation, it is necessary to include a review of the surroundings where a suspect is to be interrogated. Because there is a general desire to maintain personal integrity before family members and peer groups, suspects should be removed from familiar surroundings and taken to a location that has an atmosphere conducive to cooperative behavior and truthfulness. The primary psychological factor contributing to successful interrogations is privacy; being totally alone with suspects. This privacy prompts suspects to feel willing to unload the burden of guilt. The interrogation site should isolate the suspect so That only the interrogator is present. The suspect's thoughts and responses should be free from all outside distractions and stimuli. The interrogation setting plays an important part in obtaining confessions. The surroundings should reduce suspect fears and contribute to the inclination to discuss the crime. Because fear is a direct reinforcement for defensive mechanisms (resistance), it is important to alleviate as many fears as possible. Therefore, the interrogation rooms should establish a business atmosphere as opposed to a police-like atmosphere. While drab, barren inlerroga6on rooms increase fear in suspects, a location that displays an open, 'you have nothing to fear quality about it can do much to break down interrogation defensiveness, thereby eliminating a major barrier. The interrogators tend to disarm the suspects psychologically by placing them in surroundings that are free from any fear inducing distractions. Psychological Factors More than likely, suspects voluntarily accompany investigators, either in response to a police request to answer questions or in an attempt to learn information about the investigation. Once settled in the interrogation room, the interrogators should treat suspects in a civilized manner, no matter how vicious or serious the crime may have been. While interrogators may have feelings of disgust for the suspects, the goal is to obtain a confession and it is important that personal emotions are not be revealed. Investigators should also adopt a compassionate attitude and attempt to establish a rapport with suspects. In most cases, suspects commit crimes because they believe that it offers the best solution to their inner needs. It is important to establish a common level of understanding with suspects. Such an understanding is critical in persuading suspects to be open, forthright and honest. Suspects should be persuaded to look beyond the investigator’s badge and see instead a person who listens without judging. If investigators are able to convince suspects that he key issue is not the crime itself, but what motivated them to commit the crime, they will begin to rationalize or explain their motivating factors. At this stage of the interrogation, investigators are on the brink of having suspects break through remaining defensive barriers to admit involvement in the crime. This is the critical stage of the interrogation process commonly known as the 'breakthrough'. The Breakthrough The breakthrough is the point in the interrogation when suspects make an admission, no matter how small. In spite of having been advised of certain protections guaranteed by the law, most suspects feel a need to confess. Both hardened criminals and first time offenders suffer from the same pangs of conscience. This is an indication that their defense mechanisms are diminished, and at this point, the investigators may push through to elicit the remaining elements of the confession. In order for interrogators to pursue a successful breakthrough, they must recognize and understand certain background factors that are unique to a particular suspect. Offten, criminals exhibit psychological problems that are the result of having come from homes tom by conflict and dissension. Also frequently found in the backgrounds of criminals are parental rejection and inconsistent and severe punishment. It is important that investigators see beyond the person sitting before them and realize that past experiences can impact on current behavior. Once interrogators realize that the fear of possible punishment, coupled with loss of pride in having to admit to committing a crime is the basic inhibitor they must overcome in suspects, they will quickly be able to formulate questions and analyze responses that will break through the suspect's inhibitions. Successful Interrogations Investigators must conduct every interrogation in The belief that suspects, when presented with an attractive avenue, will use it to confess their crimes. Research indicates that most guilty persons who confess are, from the outset, looking for The proper opening during the interrogation to communicate their guilt to the interrogators. Suspects confess when the internal anxiety caused by their deception outweighs their perception of the crime's seriousness and consequences. In most instances, suspects have magnified in their minds both the severity of the crime and the possible repercussions. Interrogators should allay suspect anxiety by putting these fears into perspective. Suspects also make admissions or a confession when they believe that co-operation is the best course of action regarding their future. If they are convinced that officers are prepared to listen to all of the circumstances surrounding the crime, they will begin to talk. The psychological and physiological pressures that build in a person who has committed a crime are the best alleviated by alleviated by communication. In order to relieve these suppressed pressures, suspects detail the circumstances of the crimes they confess. Finally, suspects confess when interrogators are able to speculate correctly on why the crimes were committed. Suspects want to know ahead of time that interrogators will believe what they have to say and will understand what motivated them to commit the crime. Conclusion It is natural for suspects to want to preserve their privacy, civil rights and liberties. It is also natural for suspects to resist discussing their criminal acts. For these very reasons however, investigators must develop the skills which will enable them to remove the defensive barriers established by suspects during interrogation. Before suspects will confess they must feel comfortable in their surroundings and They must have confidence in the interrogators, who should attempt to gain this confidence by listening intently to them and by allowing them to verbalize an account of their crime. Interrogators who understand what motivates suspects to confess will be better able to formulate effective questions and analyze suspect responses. Obviously, more goes into gaining a confession than is contained in this article. However, it the interrogator fails to understand the motivations of the suspect, other factors impacting on obtaining the confession will be less effective.