•Ψ Intro to ForenPsych Ψ
Police Processes IV:
                           Investigative Interviewing
                                        Dr Rashid Minhas,
                                        Rashid.minhas@uwl.ac.uk
                                        PH 402
Why Interview?
     To ascertain the truth?         •Juries rely heavily on witness
     To allow the witness to         evidence (Dando and Milne,
      explain a set of                2009)
      circumstances                   •Vitally important that
     To obtain information and       material held in the witness’
      ‘evidence’                      memory is accessed, recalled
     To prove or disprove
                                      and recorded in as
      someone’s involvement in an     comprehensive and accurate
      offence
     To identify further lines of    manner as possible.
      enquiry
     To present this evidence to a
      court
   That Research stuff again...
• Following the introduction of PACE interviews are
  tape recorded. This allowed more research.
• Suspect interviews stated that there was:
• “a lack of preparation, general ineptitude, poor
  technique, assumptions of guilt, unduly repetitive,
  persistent or laboured questioning, a failure to
  establish the relevant facts and the exertion of too
  much pressure.” Baldwin (1992, cited in Centrex,
  2005:11)
How Do They Do With Witnesses?
• “(witness interviews) were of a much lower standard
  than the suspect tapes, in that there were far more
  leading questions asked, most of the interviewers did
  not allow the witnesses to tell their account, and the
  interviews were mainly police led, unstructured and
  not planned. I felt in most interviews the witness had
  a lot more to tell”.
  Practitioners Briefing Note for Improving Interviewing
  Skills 2002
                                     The History of Interviewing in UK – A Timeline
          1970s                               1984            1986                  1992               1999               2002           2007/2011
 Miscarriages of Justice                     P.A.C.E.    Tape Recording            P.E.A.C.E.         YJCA 1999        ACPO N.I.I.S.          .
                                                           of Suspect
        Guildford 4                          Codes of      Interviews          Memorandum of          Vulnerable,        Strategic        Revised
         Cardiff 3                           Practice                        Good Practice – video   Intimidated,      Approach to       March 2011
      Birmingham 6                                                            recording of child                       Interviewing
       Judith Ward                           Code ‘C’                            interviews            Special
      Stefan Kiszko                                                                                   measures        ‘Tiered’ system
                                                                               (Professor Eric
Reliance on hand written notes ‘as soon as    Reliance on ‘contemporaneous     Shepherd, Tom                           ‘7 Principles’
      practicable after the interview’                    notes’               Williamson etc.)
          Confession Culture                                          ‘Open-minded’, ‘ethical and transparent’, ‘search for the truth’
The 7 Principles of Investigative Interviewing
•   The aim of investigative interviewing is to obtain accurate and reliable accounts from victims, witnesses
    or suspects about matters under investigation.
•   Investigators must act fairly when questioning victims, witnesses or suspects. Vulnerable people must be
    treated with particular consideration at all times.
•   Investigative Interviewing should be approached with an investigative mindset. Accounts obtained from
    the person who is being interviewed should always be tested against what the interviewer already knows
    or what can reasonably be established.
•   When conducting an interview, investigators are free to ask a wide range of questions in order to obtain
    material which may assist an investigation.
•   Investigators should recognise the positive impact of an early admission in the context of the criminal
    justice system. (Nearest thing to ‘confession’!).
•   Investigators are not bound to accept the first answer given. Questioning is not unfair merely because it is
    persistent.
•   Even when the right of silence is exercised by a suspect, investigators have a responsibility to put
    questions to them.
•   In the UK, future miscarriages of justice are more likely to stem from the interviewing
    of witnesses, not suspects
•   Miscarriages include the guilty evading justice just as it does the innocent being
    wrongly convicted
•   Interviewing, a confession or a search for detail, checkable facts and the truth?
The PEACE
P        Planning and
          Preparation
                               • Vital to efficient and successful interview outcomes
                               • How to open an interview meeting, engage with the
E     Engage and Explain         interviewee, and establish rapport and ground rules.
                               • Addresses the most important achievable objectives of the
A    Account, Clarification,
        and Challenge
                                 interview, probing, and challenging the interviewee
                                 appropriately.
C           Closure            • What are the considerations before ending the interview.
                               • What has the interview achieved, how it fits with the
E          Evaluation            investigation purpose, what happens next, reflection on
                                 performance and development needs.
  Plan and Prepare
• The Witness
• The Offence
• Other Matters
        Engage and Explain
• ‘establishing rapport’ is a core skill of interviewing,
  describing it as necessary to “facilitate a dialogue in which
  the interviewee is encouraged to participate” (Centrex,
  2005.36).
Good practice
• Be yourself
• Be honest –create a good impression
• Check their names, their needs and their concerns
• Be empathic
• Explain what you want and the reasons for this.
• Explain the procedures
• Set ground rules
What Impact Do We Have
   On Interviewees?
               Less than
               10 % Actual
               words
               30-40%
               Tone of
               voice
               55-65% Non
               Verbal
                  Figures - Zulawski and
                  Wicklander 2001
               Ground Rules –
                Explain stuff!
• Their evidence is important
• They will need to work hard
• Don’t edit things, tell everything, even if it doesn’t seem
  relevant
• They can ask questions if they don’t understand
• It’s ok not to know something
• There will be supplementary questions to clarify points
  Remember, the witness should be doing most of the talking
• Allow them time to understand and consider the question and
  formulate their reply
• Listen carefully
             Explain Everything
• It’s ok if they don’t know something
• It’s ok to contradict if the officer has got it wrong
• We will go through things again to
  get details
• Note taking
                       Account
 Need to;-
Obtain the interviewee’s own
 uninterrupted account
Expand details in their
 account
Where necessary clarify
 (challenge) their account
Points to Prove/Defences
Interview model –C.I vs.
 Conversational management
The Cognitive Interview
      Technique
        Geiselman & Fisher
Cognitive Interview
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_QbTX2qS10
The Cognitive Interview Technique
• Geiselman & Fisher devised the Cognitive Interview Technique to
  increase the reliability and validity of Police interviews.
• Replaced the standard police interview
• Improving effectiveness of questioning witnesses in police interviews
How can we improve the accuracy of EWT?
Fisher and Geiselman (1992)
Reviewed memory literature – people remember things better if they
  are provided with retrieval cues.
This technique they devised had 4 components.
     Why?
                              Recalling how you felt and the
1.Context reinstatement   context enhance recall (these details
                                  act as cues to recall)
                          Witnesses might not realise that some
2. Report everything        details are important and details
                            might help them recall significant
                                       information
    3. Recall from a
                          Encourages many retrieval paths
  changed perspective
                                When events are recalled in
4. Recall in reverse       forward order, witnesses reconstruct
order                     based on their schemas. If the order is
                             changed they are more accurate
Cognitive Interview Technique
• Watch the following clip carefully.
• How is the cognitive interview technique different from a standard
  interview?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGRNWM8RvGQ
Kohnken et al (1999)
- meta-analysis of 53 studies            BUT
- Found on average a 34%                 - Most of the sample were
                                         university students
  increase in amount of correct
  information generated in CI
Milne and Bull (2002)
-Found that when they used a
combination of                           BUT
“report everything” and “context         - Still in a laboratory - artificial
reinstatement”,
participants’ recall was significantly
higher.
Individual Differences
Mello and Fisher (1996)
When CI and normal interview techniques were tested on both older
 adults’ (72 years) and younger adults’ (22 years) memory, CI was
 better for both.
But was more significantly an advantage for the elderly.
Which stage do these prompts relate to?
    Please do not edit anything out of       Think about how you were feeling
    your report, even things you think       at the time and think about your
    may not be important.                    reactions to the incident.
                               2                                         1
    Try starting with the thing that            Think about what the surrounding
    impressed you the most in the               environment looked like at the
    incident and then go from there,            scene, such as rooms, the weather,
    going both forward in time and              any nearby people or objects.
                                                                            1
    backward.            4
                                Try to place yourself in the role of a
                                prominent character in the incident
                                and think about what he or she
                                must have seen.                  3
Cognitive Interview, a success?
Police officers do not regularly fully apply the model and
 that when they do, it is often poorly applied (Memon,
 Holley, Milne, Kohnken And Bull, (1994) cited in Dando,
 Wilock, Milne, and Henry (2009)
Officers often edit out the parts of C.I. which they do not
 believe work or find too complicated for either the witness
 or themselves (Dando, Wilcock, Milne and Henry, 2009).
Usually this is the last two components.
C.I. does take longer to conduct (Dando, Wilcock, Milne and
 Henry, 2009.)
It is less effective on young children and persons with
 certain mental disabilities and it appears less effective when
 very long retention intervals between the event and the
 recollection are involved (Esgate and Groome, 2005).
 Dando, Wilcock and Milne (2008a) found that
  between 34% and 40% of police officers said they
  felt pressurised to hurry whilst completing witness
  interviews
 Practitioners often felt they are insufficiently trained
  in its use or because they have concerns about the
  efficacy of some of the techniques (Memon
  Meisssner and Fraser)
 Wagstaff, Wheatcroft, Caddicka, Kirbya and Lamonta
  (2011) C.I. With LIP?
                      5       T.E.D.
                     W.H.
Questioning Styles
                            Probe
                       Narrative
               Sketch Plans
• Clarifies things
• Memory cue
                       Closure
•Have you covered everything you need to?
•Have we covered the ‘points to prove’?
•Has the interviewee provided all the information they
are able to?
•Have you got a clear understanding of what has
been said?
                    Closure
Explain what will happen next –short and long
term
Be honest and don’t make promises
Have they got any questions or comments?
Witness - Finish on a ‘neutral subject.’
Contact details
Witness Charter
              Evaluate
• What information have we got?
• What effect does this have on
  the investigation?
• Further lines of enquiry
• How did we do?
A strength of PEACE                         Assumption
                                               of the
                                              issue(s)
Overcoming unconscious
barriers and behaviours
                          Reinforces                            Leads to
  Confirmation biases
                            Poor forensic
                             questions,                  Confirmation
                             NVCs, more                      Bias
                            assumptions
                                               Using