Traditional, Structural, and Inferential Interviewing with Statement Analysis Techniques Chapter 4 4-1

Traditional Interviewing Just-the-facts approach Use for witness evaluation Preliminary assessments To obtain emergency response information For field interviewing with limited time

Identify the Sources Side-tracker One who falsely claims involvement as a witness or suspect to a crime

Complainant The person who reports a crime or accuses another of an offense Victim or witness

Guidelines for Traditional Interviewing Ask questions to answer in any order Who, what, when, where, why, how

Determine the Actus Reus Determine if a crime has been committed Determine the nature of the offense

Obtain an Admission Where Relevant An admission is when a person gives information of having been involved in a crime but downplays their role or lies about the extent of their behavior

What? What offense was committed? What happened? What weapon was used? What was said? What did the eyewitness hear or see?

What? Avoid leading questions Avoid sounding accusatory

Who? Who is the victim? Who is the perpetrator? Who are the witnesses?

Who? Get names, addresses, telephone numbers, and physical descriptions Find out if there are any family relationships Obtain prior record information Search records for outstanding warrants

When? When did this incident occur? When was the event reported? When did injuries occur? When did the injured seek medical attention?

When 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?

Where? Where was the location of the incident? Where did the event begin and where did it end? Where were the witnesses located in relation to the offense?

Where? Determine the jurisdiction of the crime Does the event cross multiple jurisdictions? Were the witnesses located to accurately view or hear what they report? Were there indications of force or forced entry?

Why? Establish the mens rea Perpetrator state of mind

Mens Rea Purposefulness: What is the reason or goal of the act? Knowing: What was the activity that the person should have known will bring consequences? Reckless behavior: Is the behavior one that increases the risk of harm? Neglect: A failure to act where a duty of care exists

How? How did it happen? How was the victim approached? How did the perpetrator gain access? How often has a similar event occurred?

How? Include information leading up to the event and after the event Determine the sequence of events

Conducting the Traditional Interview Treat all with dignity Be courteous and professional Avoid professional jargon Do not make ANY promises Never suggest confidentiality Establish rapport

Tools Use sketches and drawings Leave with the understanding they may be contacted again Get contact information

Indirect Approach Exploratory to find out what they know Use open-ended questions Clarifying questions Avoid leading questions

Vs. Direct Approach Ask specific questions Avoid leading questions Use with an uncooperative person Determine source of difficulty

Structural Interview Designed to maximize recall and minimize contamination Adds rapport building, narrative description, and an ample interviewee response to the traditional interview method

Structural Interview 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 and completely

Structural Interviewing Steps Build rapport Obtain narrative description from non-leading and open questions Allow ample interviewee response time

Structural Interviewing Steps Use specific probing questions to elaborate Request the interviewee recount the entire event a second time

Inferential Interviewing: Four Principles to Discover Dishonesty Coherency: A statement should make sense by not violating the rules of nature or contradicting itself

Discover Dishonesty 2. Response Rate: Deception is associated with shorter response length, a slower rate of speech, and more speech errors (verbal leakage)

Discover Dishonesty 3. Type-Token Ratio: Unique words divided by total words in a statement

Discover Dishonesty 4. Verbal Hedges: Verbal techniques used to buy additional processing time

Verbal Hedging Methods to avoid answering and to buy time

Examples of Verbal Hedging Unnecessary use of connectors— Uhs… ums… ands… ors… Repeating all or part of the interviewer’s question before responding Claimed lack of memory I couldn’t see, wasn’t paying attention Repeated extraneous information He said, she said, he did, she did

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

Components of Statement Analysis Parts of speech Extraneous information Lack of conviction Statement balance

Parts of Speech Evaluate pronoun, noun, verb, adjective Establish the norm in the statement Look for changes to the norm, evaluate why

Example Example in rape case: My story (noun) has never changed; I would never hurt (verb) the child (adjective), I love (verb) him

Pronouns Truthful persons provide statements using the pronoun “I,” first person singular Overuse of “we” indicates a lack of commitment and unwillingness to take responsibility

Examples 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.

Nouns A change in noun use signifies a change in the reality of the suspect

Examples 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.

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

Examples Example of the norm: I saw the shooting, I was so scared that I ran as fast as I could. Example of a deviation: I saw the shooting. I am so scared that I run away as fast as I can.

Verbs Statements which contain verbs such as “tried” or “started” represent a weakened assertion of the facts

Examples Example of the norm: I screamed “no” over and over. Example of a deviation: I tried to scream “no” over and over.

Adjectives Use of “that” and “those” to refer to a person suggests distancing

Examples Example of the norm: I did not hurt David. Example of a deviation: I did not hurt that child.

Field Statement Analysis A shortened version of the statement analysis Uses two rather than four components Lack of conviction Extraneous information

Lack of Conviction A truthful statement is given with conviction Frequent “I don’t remember” or “I believe” or “kind of surprised” are suspect

Extraneous Information A truthful person will provide events in a chronological order A truthful statement contains three parts; prior to the event, the event, and afterwards They should contain roughly the same amount of information