Interrogation and Interviewing Questions.

[ankyle62]

Im writing a research paper for my forensic psychology class and was wondering if I could ask you some questions. The paper is related to false or coerced confessions during interrogation/interviewing. I've read a bit on the psychological perspective of it and was just trying to get a real world opinion on it.


Do you receive training to detect whether or not a person has the potential for to give a false confession?

Are there guide lines for the department as far as the type of interviewing that can be done, the length, the time frame, or any other rules to prevent a false confession?

Have you ever experienced a false confession? Such as someone looking for fame and admitting to a crime they didn't commit or someone psychologically compromised that admits to it out of desperation to stop the interrogation process?

I understand that officers in general are out to find the truth and the true perpetrator, but have you ever experienced an officer just looking for the conviction?

Do you have any other information that may be helpful related to the topic?

It's a pretty basic paper, but I wanted to try to add some more to it or get a different perspective on things. I wont be mentioning names or the department you work for.

Thank you for any help you can provide. Feel free to respond in a private message as I know Calguns has issues with anti-leo types.

Kyle

[SVT-40]

You might as well look for unicorns.

Actual "false" confessions are just about as rare.

True "coerced" confessions ... See below

The only goal in a interrogation is finding the truth.

[Notorious]

Hard as it is for some to believe, we look to exonerate people as much as we do to incriminate people. Our job is to find the truth. If things don't add up, we keep digging until it makes sense.

[TRICKSTER]

As it has already been posted, you might want to find a more common subject for you paper. Never seen a false or coerced confession. Our job is to investigate and find out who really committed the crime. If someone ever did confess and his story didn't add up, I would keep investigating until it was sorted out.

[ankyle62]

I know it's rare, but do you receive training on it or is it is discussed in training that certain techniques could lead to it? Is there policy related to limits on interrogation such as time limits, the time it can take place, or even the type?

There are quite a few cases and research into the subject on the psychology side, but I wanted to know if it was something covered in training or something officers are aware of.

[fullrearview]

Here is a well made video on coerced confessions. They are real and happen all the time!

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/33f2687080/good-cop-baby-cop-from-will-ferrell-and-adam-ghost-panther-mckay

[fullrearview]

But in all seriousness, we are looking for the truth.

[ankyle62]

But in all seriousness, we are looking for the truth.

Yes, I'm fully aware of this, and by no means am I suggesting that any law enforcement officer has malicious intent against anyone.

Some basic info

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_confession

[fullrearview]

Yes, I'm fully aware of this, and by no means am I suggesting that any law enforcement officer has malicious intent against anyone.

Some basic info
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_confession

Even though that is a wikipedia link, yes there has been some instances where a person has been questioned and admitted to something they didn't do... I however can not cite them, and I have not seen one myself. Like it was said, try to find unicorns instead, because they are rare. Also as it was said on wikipieda, the person may have had a mental disorder.

I do remember seeing a video about the topic at hand but it has been years, and I don't know if it was in the academy or not.

[mixicus]

Though interview and interrogation have overlap they are different animals in structure, prep, environment, participants, etc. It seems like you are considering only the interrogation. Interrogations do not happen in a vacuum. By the time that type of chat occurs with a subject, there's other information already on board. The investigator probably has the answer to the question or at least really sure of a direction.

"There are quite a few cases and research into the subject on the psychology side, but I wanted to know if it was something covered in training or something officers are aware of."

"Quite a few cases"....hmmm be careful with this type of thought and frame the reference. Even in a small suburban mostly residential city, there will be 25,000 calls for service and 1,000 arrests each year. Each arrest is going to have the officer(s) talking to at least one person, the suspect, but more likely two subject (suspect and witness). So your talking about 1,000's of interviews/interrogations each year. Never mind how many people officers talk to each day some of whom are lying. Now multiply that by how many departments in any geographical area and compare to the case studies. Conclusions based on tatistics are variable.

Here's some thoughts on some of your questions:

Do you receive training to detect whether or not a person has the potential for to give a false confession?
Most get some training in basic interview and interrogation at the academy. There are several groups/programs out there (Reid & Assocaites, 3rd Degree and BATI) that offer more detailed training in interview/interrogation. There are also seminars non-verbal communications, "detecting deception" would be included. Usually officers assigned to investigations get sent but street officers can put in for it too.

Do officers in general care about false or coerced confessions, or are they just looking for an easy conviction of someone?
OK I had to take a breath and back off the accelerator before answering this question. So here's the polite version: getting to the truth and solving the crime/issue is what it's about. It doesn't do the community any good to not apprehend the correct person.

Have you ever experienced a false confession?
Sure. The most common is along the lines of "I was driving the car" after a traffic collision when the passenger is staggering drunk. It takes about 3 seconds to figure out it's a false confession because injuries don't match stories (seat belt marks, air bag "burns", etc.). Your follow on about "fame" is relative. Yeah maybe some punk may want credit for a violent crime to make his bones in the neighborhood but that is rare and could get him killed by the actual doer (think gangs). Most crimes are barely heard about in the local community much less at the state or national level so the "fame" driver, like you see on TV dramas, is almost non-existent. Even if there's a confession the statements need to be investigated and supported which takes time and resources. So again, it's in law enforcement's interest to get the truth not chase some false statement.

[ankyle62]

I was just using a wikipedia link as a simple reference, I have plenty of published journals researching the topic.

I'm aware it's rare and like searching for an unicorn as far as finding an actual case. I was more curious about the training, and guidelines related to interrogation process. Can you interrogate someone for 24 hours straight, those type of things.

[ankyle62]

Mixicus, that one question was worded poorly. I edited it in the original post.

[cacop]

Im writing a research paper for my forensic psychology class and was wondering if I could ask you some questions. The paper is related to false or coerced confessions during interrogation/interviewing. I've read a bit on the psychological perspective of it and was just trying to get a real world opinion on it.


Do you receive training to detect whether or not a person has the potential for to give a false confession?

We are trained to find the truth. If someone is lying to make us think they did it we will find it if we look for the truth. You really need to look at interview and interrogation class outlines or books. Even better would be to go to training sessions.

Are there guide lines for the department as far as the type of interviewing that can be done, the length, the time frame, or any other rules to prevent a false confession?

No department guidelines but you really need to research case law from the courts. That is what we have to follow. Be aware there are no hard and fast rules such as no longer than 8 hours or they must be given a break after 6 hours. The courts look at all the circumstances in each case.

Have you ever experienced a false confession? Such as someone looking for fame and admitting to a crime they didn't commit or someone psychologically compromised that admits to it out of desperation to stop the interrogation process?

Nope. And neither has anyone in the recent history of the department. And by recent history I mean post Miranda time because when I started we still had old timers on who remembered when Miranda was new and they never mentioned a false confession.

I understand that officers in general are out to find the truth and the true perpetrator, but have you ever experienced an officer just looking for the conviction?

Nope. Pure Hollywood.

Do you have any other information that may be helpful related to the topic?

You clearly need to research Miranda law and interview/interogation training. Of course with college being the way it is your instructor will probably give you an A for blaming all of societies problems on the police. And this is coming from a college grad so I know what I am talking about.

It's a pretty basic paper, but I wanted to try to add some more to it or get a different perspective on things. I wont be mentioning names or the department you work for.

Thank you for any help you can provide. Feel free to respond in a private message as I know Calguns has issues with anti-leo types.

Kyle

False confessions just don't happen unless there is a perfect storm of someone looking to please and officer or looking for fame AND the officer did not practice good interview and interrogation techniques.

For example say you have a murder in town and someone comes in to confess it. If you do it right you hold out as much information as possible so that they fill in the blanks. As they fill in the blanks with info the killer should know you can be confident they are telling the truth (or at least something close to the truth). Now if you start hearing them screwing up details you can press them on those differences to get them to confess they are not guilty. Details could be as simple as the old murder weapon bit. You know it was a kitchen knife because it was sticking out of them like they were a Thanksgiving turkey but they tell you it was a folding knife they carry.

Now if an officer is sitting there feeding info to the suspect for them to repeat it back like a parrot AND the person wants to be convicted of a crime they didn't committ then false confessions could happen.

It's not that hard to do your job right.

[ankyle62]

You clearly need to research Miranda law and interview/interogation training. Of course with college being the way it is your instructor will probably give you an A for blaming all of societies problems on the police. And this is coming from a college grad so I know what I am talking about.

My instructor is very pro law enforcement, as am I. If I were to bad mouth any law enforcement(which I never would) it would probably adversely affect my grade.
My paper is mainly looking at the personalities of the people in past cases that have falsely confessed.
I would love to be able to look at some of the interview/interrogation manuals if they were available online, but that would be mainly for my personal interest.

Now if an officer is sitting there feeding info to the suspect for them to repeat it back like a parrot AND the person wants to be convicted of a crime they didn't committ then false confessions could happen.

In most cases Ive looked at this is the case.





Thank you for the help.

[TRICKSTER]

If you really want to do an interesting paper, do it on the psychology of victims that make false reports of crimes. Plenty of subject matter there.