Deception

Deception

Whether conducted by the patrol officer, the victim’s advocate, the prosecutor or the investigator assigned to a special unit in the criminal investigation division, the interview of a victim, witness, suspect or informant is a critical element of any investigation. Precious resources in the form of man power, money, time and equipment can be wasted because of the failure of the interviewer to conduct a complete interview and accurately evaluate the credibility of the information gained from the subject interviewed.

As a part of the three pillars of the criminal investigative process, a thorough and complete interview provides greater insight into the psychological elements of the suspect or even victim’s behaviors during the commission of the crime. The interview can also provide understanding of and give a clear definition to the evidence isolated by the forensic investigation of the case. In spite of its importance however, the value of the interview alone can be nil without the psychological and forensic pillars. By the same token a poorly executed interview along with a flawed effort to assess credibility can degrade if not destroy the efforts in the forensic and psychological portions of the investigation and any subsequent prosecution.

A complete and successful interview will almost always be characterized by four basic elements: orientation, narration, cross-examination and resolution. In its own way, each of these four elements is unique and accomplishes specific goals. Without all four elements no interview will be complete.

Orientation is accomplished on both an overt and covert level. Overtly the function of the orientation period is to establish some form of dialogue with the subject being interviewed. This can be achieved through personal introductions and possibly some form of brief light conversation if conditions and time permit. It is also the period during which the interviewer advises the subject as to the purpose of the interview, its importance, and the necessity to be totally forthcoming, honest and cooperative. Granted in many cases this is not going to be a socially comfortable situation nor will it always intended to be so. Covertly the objective of the investigative interviewer to establish some form of understanding of the person baseline or “constant” of normal verbal and non-verbal behaviors. It is with “constant” in mind the interviewer will be able to readily identify significant changes in the subject’s emotional and mentally status which may need further exploration at a later point during the interview.

The next phase of the interview is the narration. In this segment the subject of the interview is offered the opportunity to relate the facts and information within their realm of knowledge that they believe is most important to them. It is critical at this point for the interviewer to permit the subject the opportunity to fully disclose all the information that feel critical. The subject may be asked to described what they have heard about the incident or possibly their opinion about what they think might have happened. The interview will also offer encouragement for a subject to continue their narration if at some point they appear to have run out of steam and their narration is incomplete. The interviewer’s task during the narration is to make an assessment of the subject behavior to determine the degree of credibility to the subject remarks. Having already established a “constant” from the orientation portion the interviewer looks for significant “changes” in the subject’s demeanor that suggest an increase in stress on both the mental and emotional level. These “changes” suggest that the topic area is significant to the speaker and may in fact be locations where there may be deception on the part of the subject. The investigative interviewer will also make note of any inconsistencies in the description of events and the exiting forensic details and the contents of any other previous interviews with other subjects, victims, or witnesses.

Once armed with the information gained during the narrative and an analysis of possible deception the interviewer then moves into the “cross-examination” phase. The task before the interviewer now is to address the inconsistencies identified in the subject’s narrative and attempt to ascertain the full details omitted or altered and clarify the true facts. It is also the opportunity for the investigative interviewer to revisit any topic areas during which the subject exhibited significant stress changes to determine the cause of those changes in behavior. Did they occur because the subject is embarrassed about disclosing certain details? Was it because they have been traumatized by the events? Have these behavioral symptoms occurred because the subject has either withheld details or fabricated information in