Investigations-Witness statements and interviewing

Eyewitness

A person who directly saw the criminal event take place

Corroborative witness

A person who can provide circumstantial or indirect evidence of the events surrounding the crime

Independent witness

A witness who has nothing to gain or lose by the outcome of the case. They are not associated with anybody or anything in the criminal event.

Looking for corroborative evidence

Investigators need to be skilled at discovering additional physical and circumstantial evidence that can assist the court in reaching a conclusion in relation to the evidence of a witness

Truthfully incorrect witness

A witness whose genuine belief is that what they are saying is true and correct, even if it is not.

Conformity

A dominant witness can influence statements of the other witnesses. This results in witnesses having to be separated.

Uncooperative witness

Witnesses who are unwilling to cooperate no matter what, may be leading a criminal lifestyle.

Factors related to witness credibility assessment

1. Witness profile

2. Witness bias-motivation to lie

3. Witness involvement-emotional impact of the event

4. Location when viewing the event

5. Awareness-intent to observe and recall the occurrence

6. Length of observation time

7. Time elapsed between the event and the interview

8. Ability to record or repetitively recount details

9. Physical abilities/limitations

10. Cognitive capacity and age

Field/witness interview

What happened here? No information or assumptions on who is a suspect-spontaneous utterance (res gestae) would likely be admitted as evidence. Be sure to take the witness’ formal statement as soon as possible.

Purpose of an interview

1. Gather information to determine whether an offence has been committed

2. Identify person(s) responsible for the offence

3. Obtain evidence to aid the investigation and prosecution

Interview

Refers to questioning of a witness-usually an observer or a non traumatized victim of a crime

Interrogation

Term used by lawyers, judges and case law referring to questioning of a suspect or accused person

Exploratory questioning

Is a blended type of questioning used when the person being questioned may be a witness or a suspect

Types of questions

1. Open ended questions (T.E.D-tell me more, explain, describe)

2. Close ended-Intended to generate only one fact

Advantages of closed ended questions

1. Prevent haphazard descriptions

2. Add structure to the interview

3. Clarify general or vague answers

4. Generate relevant facts

Disadvantages of close ended questions

1. May result in less retrieval from the witness

2. Mental passivity develops-Witness becomes accustomed to waiting for the next question rather than trying to remember

3. Responses are limited to the request made-witness may not offer more information than has been asked

Leading questions

Questions that imply, suggest, or contain an answer (was the car red?)

Misleading questions

When an investigator has knowledge of the fact that they are asking, they may test a witness by asking a different question

Ex: Suspect is known to be 20 years old, detective asks “was the suspect around 50 years old?”

P.E.A.C.E model

1. Planning and preparation

2. Engage and Explain (establish rapport with subject, fully explain purpose and procedure of interview before starting)

3. Account and Clarification-Obtain subjects verbatim uninterrupted account of the event(s)

4. Closure

5. Evaluation

Interrogation Techniques

Reid model-Uses 9 steps to elicit a confession

1. Direct and immediate confrontation

2. Justification of the fact to minimize seriousness

3. Prohibiting the suspect from denying guilt

4. Overcoming any objections made by the suspect

5. Techniques of re-engagement if suspect distances themselves

6. Sympathize with passive suspects

7. Alternative questions to allow the suspect to admit guilt in a way that looks more favorable

8. Urge suspect to provide more detail surrounding the offence

9. Obtain a written statement of confession

   (Also includes P.EA.C.E) model

Reasons for confession in an interrogation

1. Wishing to exonerate oneself

2. Attempting deception to outsmart the system

3. Conscience

4. Minimizing ones involvement in a crime

5. Surrender in the face of overwhelming evidence

Benefits of the PEACE model

1. Does not make use of coercive or manipulative strategies

2. Its effectiveness at avoiding problems associated with the Reid technique does not result in a decrease of confessions

3. Its use of principles of the cognitive interview, which is an effective memory enhancement technique for cooperative interviewees