Traditional Structured, and Inferential Interviewing with Statement Analysis Techniques Chapter 4
Download ReportTranscript Traditional Structured, and Inferential Interviewing with Statement Analysis Techniques Chapter 4
Traditional Structured, and Inferential Interviewing with Statement Analysis Techniques Chapter 4 Source Identification Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin Information typically comes from multiple sources that must be approached to determine their willingness to provide information. 4-2 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Identify the Sources Side-tracker Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin One who falsely claims involvement as a witness or suspect to a crime 4-3 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Identify the Sources Complainant A person who reports a crime or accuses another of an offense Victim or witness Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin 4-4 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Traditional Interviewing: Just-the-facts approach Use for witness evaluation Preliminary assessments To obtain emergency response information For field interviewing with limited time Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin 4-5 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Guidelines for Traditional Interviewing Ask questions to answer in any order Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin What, who, when, where, why, how 4-6 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 What happened? Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin What offense was committed? What happened? What weapon was used? What was said? What did the eyewitness hear or see? Avoid leading questions Avoid sounding accusatory 4-7 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Determine the Actus Actus reus is a term which means the “guilty act” Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin 4-8 reus Is the act a violation of the law? Has a crime been committed? What is the nature of the offense PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Who is involved? Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin Who is the victim? Who is the perpetrator? Who are the witnesses? Get names, addresses, telephone numbers and physical descriptions Find out if there any family relationships Obtain prior record information Search records for outstanding warrants 4-9 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 When did this incident occur? Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin When was the event reported? When did injuries occur? When did the injured seek medical attention? Is the incident still ongoing? How old or new is the complaint? Has this type of offense ever occurred against the victim in the past? 4-10 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Where was the location of the incident? Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin Where did the event begin and where did it end? Where were the witnesses located in relation to the offense? Determine the jurisdiction of the crime Does the event cross multiple jurisdictions? How were the witnesses located to accurately view or hear what they report? Were there indications of force or forced entry? 4-11 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Why did this occur? Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin Purposefulness Knowing Reckless behavior Neglect 4-12 What is the reason or goal of the act? Was the activity something that the person should have known would bring consequences? Was the behavior one that increases the risk of harm? A failure to act where a duty of care exists PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Establish the mens rea Refers to the state of mind of the perpetrator, not the victim Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin 4-13 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 How did it happen? Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin How was the victim approached? How did the perpetrator gain access? How often has a similar even occurred? Include information leading up to the event and after the event Determine the sequence of events 4-14 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Conducting the Traditional Interview Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin Treat all with dignity Be courteous and professional Avoid professional jargon Do not make ANY promises Never suggest confidentiality Establish rapport 4-15 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Tools Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin Use sketches & drawings Take photographs Use audio or video recording 4-16 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Indirect Approach Exploratory to find out what they know Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin Use openended questions Clarifying questions Avoid leading questions 4-17 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Direct Approach Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin Ask specific closed-ended questions Avoid leading questions Use with an uncooperative person Determine any source of difficulty 4-18 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 How does Structured Interviewing differ from Traditional Interviewing? Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin Structured interviewing is a method that builds on the traditional interview by adding three steps 4-19 1. Build Rapport 2. Obtain narrative description from non-leading and open questions 3. Allow ample interviewee response time PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Structured Interview Components Incorporate active listening skills Use of open-ended questions Appropriate non-verbal behavior Encourage active participation by the interviewee Do not interrupt narratives Record accurately & completely Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin 4-20 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Inferential Interviewing 4 principles to discover dishonesty 1. 2. 3. 4. Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin Coherency: A statement should make sense by not violating the rules of nature or contradict itself Response Rate: Deception is associated with shorter response length, a slower rate of speech, and more speech errors (verbal leakage) Type-Token Ratio: Unique words divided by total words in a statement Verbal Hedging: verbal techniques used to avoid answering and buy additional processing time 4-21 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Definition of Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin Statement Analysis A word-by-word examination of the grammar within a statement Can be used with any method of interviewing as an assessment of deception Both written and oral statements can be evaluated 4-22 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Components of Statement Analysis 1. 2. 3. 4. Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin Parts of speech Extraneous information Lack of conviction Statement balance 4-23 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Methods for Evaluating the Parts of Speech Evaluate pronoun, noun, verb, adjective Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin Establish the norm in the statement Look for changes to the norm, evaluate why 4-24 Example in rape case: My story (noun) has never changed; I would never hurt (verb) the child (adjective), I love (verb) him PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Pronouns Truthful persons provide statements using the pronoun “I”, first person singular Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin Overuse of “we” indicates a lack of commitment and unwillingness to take responsibility 4-25 Example of truthfulness: I woke up and went to school. I met some friends and we went to class together. At noon we all left. Example of lack of commitment: I woke up. We all met and went to class. We left when the lunch bell rang. PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Nouns A change in noun use signifies a change in the reality of the suspect Example of the norm: I loved my baby. I did not mean to hurt my baby, but I drowned her. Example of a deviation: I loved my baby. I did not mean to hurt my baby, she went under the water and something kept her down. Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin 4-26 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Verbs It is normal to use the first person, singular past tense to recall past events Change in the tense of the verb signals possible deception Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin 4-27 Example of the norm: I saw the shooting I was so scared that I ran as fast as I could Statements which contain verbs such as “tried” or “started” represent a weakened assertion of the facts PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Adjectives Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin Use of “that” and “those” to refer to a person suggests distancing 4-28 Example of the norm: I did not hurt David Example of a deviation: I did not hurt that child PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Statement Balance Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin A truthful statement contains three parts; prior to the event, the event, and afterwards 4-29 They should contain roughly the same amount of information A truthful person will provide these events in a chronological order PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Field Statement Analysis A shortened version of the Statement Analysis Uses two rather than four components Lack of conviction Extraneous information Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin 4-30 PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Lack of Conviction Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin The lack of conviction refers to words that are used to label or change the meaning of something 4-31 Frequent “I don’t remember” or “I believe” or “kind of surprised” are suspect PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458 Extraneous Information Smart Talk: Contemporary Interviewing and Interrogation By Denise Kindschi Gosselin The person who attempts to justify their actions will give extraneous information, statements that does not answer the question 4-32 To measure extraneous information count the statement’s total number of lines, identifying which contain unnecessary information PRENTICE HALL ©2006 Pearson Education, Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458