Running head: POLICE INTERROGATION INTERVIEWS 1
Police Interrogation Interviews
Name
Institutional Affiliation
POLICE INTERROGATION INTERVIEWS 2
Police Interrogation Interviews
Introduction
Police interrogation interviews are techniques used to gather information from suspects
or potential witnesses to gather facts about crimes aiming to solve them. Interrogation and
interviewing are dominant in contemporary policing, given that they are objective, measurable,
and ethical. The modern police use various interrogation methods, including deception, empathy,
defection, dominance, polygraph tests, and confrontation depending on the nature of crimes and
suspects’ rights. This paper explores the concept of police interrogation interviews, focusing on
the various approaches and their implications on justice.
History
A historical analysis of police interrogations is also necessary for comprehending the
changes in the tactic used and their implications on justice. Woody (2019) contends that coercive
interrogation methods dominated the criminal justice system during the 20th century and before.
Courts cared less about the interrogation methods used by police. Arguably, coercive
interrogation methods culminated in unreliable information besides raising critical questions
regarding human rights violations (Woody, 2019). There has been a significant change in
interrogation laws from the near end of the last century, assuring suspects of their human rights
and yielding reliable information.
A review of the history of police interrogations reveals the consideration of confessions
as convictions. Maclin (2015) observed that the central role of the police in criminal
investigations was to get confessions from suspects. Investigators often used physical and
psychological to extract confessions. There was a routine administration of admissions into
evidence without raising fundamental questions to ascertain credibility. However, there has been
POLICE INTERROGATION INTERVIEWS 3
a gradual change over the centuries due to the growth of democracy and the need to secure
people's rights and liberties. The status of confessions in the criminal justice system changed
from the courts' limiting the administration into evidence of ordinary admissions in the mid-
1700s to altogether rejecting forced confessions in the late-1800s (Maclin, 2015). Notably,
defending suspects' respectable rights and freedoms has become an essential component of police
investigation. The evolution of the law of interrogation aligns with the growth of democratic
ideals. Eliminating the culture of threat perception in police investigation reduces interrogation
pressure; thus, enhancing objectivity in criminal proceedings. Debatably, police should use all
the investigative resources to get to the core of crimes and nub the real offenders.
Pros and Cons
Using police interrogation methods to source information is a matter worth debating
considering the many controversies that surround it. Some researchers applaud them for helping
the solve crimes while other negate them, arguing that they pervert justice. The pros of police
interrogation techniques include the ease to obtain high-value information and the ability to solve
many crimes. The major shortcoming of these techniques is that they can result in unreliable
information. Notably, coercive interrogation techniques increase the risk of distortion of justice
as they result in inaccurate or false information (Adam & Van Golde, 2020). Many interrogation
methods have resulted in criticism because they cause human rights infringement, for instance,
preventing suspects from accessing essentialities such as sleep, water, or food.
Understanding the different types of police interrogation techniques is necessary for
demystifying police interviews. According to Birzer and Roberson (2018), the four main
interrogation techniques used by the police when interviewing suspects are informal questioning,
lying, and Reid technique. Informal questioning happens anytime an individual encounters a
POLICE INTERROGATION INTERVIEWS 4
police officer. Any conversation with a police officer can qualify as evidence. People have a
right to limit their conversations with police officers whenever they stop them and start asking
them questions. They can keep silent or request to leave if they are not under arrest. Lying is a
technology embedded in the myth that police officers always speak and act truthfully. The lines
between promises and impermissible threats, which dominate police investigations and the legal
or permissible approaches, seem unclear. This makes the presence of an attorney a vital factor in
police investigations. Attorneys hold the police accountable by emphasizing the use of legal
investigative procedures (Birzer & Roberson, 2018).
Markedly, the approaches and techniques used by police officers when interrogating
suspects reflect the need to promote justice in democratic societies. Police have the burden of
solving crime using all the available legal means. However, it is the same pressure to solve
crimes that cause the police to, at times, overlook the values of fair play and the right to silence
as captured in fundamental justice. Often, this contradiction culminates in a fine line between
impartial inquiries in criminal proceedings and the application of psychologically coercive
means equivalent to torture. Kassin et al. (2010) contend that policy-induced confessions are
subject to cultural, historical, legal, political, and other contextual stimuli. Notably, police
interrogation is a growing concept, given the increased use of psychological tools and
approaches to procure information related to a crime from suspects or witnesses. Seemingly,
police, especially in the United States, tend to violate constitutional rights by forcing confessions
out of citizens. They subvert the principle of “being innocent till proven guilty” by treating
suspects like convicted criminals. A point worth making is that even criminals must enjoy some
rights as stated in the constitution. Most complaints reveal that people booked for alleged crimes
have minimal chances of evading prosecution because of the police’s desperation to convict
POLICE INTERROGATION INTERVIEWS 5
criminals. A view from most people is that the police want to appear as though they are doing a
great job of maintaining law and order. However, their foul play in investigations only increases
the incarceration rate and does not serve justice (Kassin et al., 2010). Arguably, forced
confessions or tricking people into admissions is a perversion of justice.
As remarked earlier, police interrogation interviews are essential in the current criminal
justice system because they are essential for solving crimes and serving justice to the victims and
perpetrators. Perhaps, a vital question at this point concerns the threshold for identifying and
convicting criminals. Police interrogation interviews are crucial in gathering evidence
concerning a crime. Stelfox (2013) explained that established legal parameters are processes for
conducting police investigations, including questioning, interviewing, and interrogating suspects
and witnesses. Police officers must follow the established legal procedures and parameters for
successful prosecution. Otherwise, the evidence gathered by the police might be rendered
inadmissible. In other terms, it takes the right approach to police interrogation interviews for the
courts to accept the evidence or information necessary for making a verdict in criminal cases.
Law enforcement officers use interviews to gather evidence by questioning. The answers and all
information provided can be part of the evidence in criminal proceedings in Court. Conceivably,
the prosecution’s case relies on the summary of evidence. The primary goal of police interviews
is to gather information to help the investigation and eventually build a strong argument in Court.
Interviewing, especially in complex investigations, is a planned process. The police have an
advantage because they can help them stick to their plan. Arguably, disclosure before an
interview may cause suspects to omit crucial evidence (Stelfox, 2013). Such severe errors make
the work of prosecution attorneys difficult, as they cannot adequately explain or advise as to the
degree of evidence possessed by the police.
POLICE INTERROGATION INTERVIEWS 6
From the discussion above, one can tell that police interrogation is highly procedural.
Most people outside the confines of the criminal justice system can easily assume that police
merely ask questions randomly to determine people’s involvement in a crime. The first learning
point drawn from the discussion is that police interrogations must happen within a given legal
framework to meet the threshold of prosecution. Secondly, I have learned that the police must
involve the defense team in their investigations. The failure of the police to observe specific
procedures may as well result in the collapse of cases in Court. Defense attorneys often explore
the cracks in policy interrogations to taint the criminal cases presented by the prosecution
attorneys against their clients. For instance, judges can throw out a case because the police failed
to read the Miranda rights to the suspect (Maclin, 2015). One would easily assume that the police
should conceal their evidence and only present it in Court. However, the openness of the
criminal justice system, especially in lead democracies in the world, requires the police to
disclose new evidence discovered through ongoing interrogations to the defense team to help
them build their case. Experts in criminal and legal matters contend that such approaches are
essential in serving justice in criminal cases. Arguably, the police investigation is not as easy as
it may appear, considering the necessary procedures to observe to make the evidence admissible
before judges or magistrates.
Conclusion
In summary, police interrogation interviews are essential in law enforcement. The police
use different methods to collect information from suspects. Some methods result in many
criticisms for violating human rights and yielding false information. The pressure by the police
to convict criminals often causes them to subvert justice by coercing suspects into making
confessions. Such confessions could imply wrongful convictions when administered into
POLICE INTERROGATION INTERVIEWS 7
evidence. Imperatively, players in the criminal justice system should advocate more for
interrogation techniques that promote human rights while increasing the chances of collecting
accurate information.
POLICE INTERROGATION INTERVIEWS 8
References
Adam, L., & van Golde, C. (2020). Police practice and false confessions: A search for the
implementation of investigative interviewing in Australia. Alternative Law Journal,
45(1), 52-59.
Birzer, M., & Roberson, C. (2018). Introduction to criminal investigation. Routledge.
Kassin, S. M., Drizin, S. A., Grisso, T., Gudjonsson, G. H., Leo, R. A., & Redlich, A. D. (2010).
Police-induced confessions: Risk factors and recommendations. Law and human
behavior, 34(1), 3-38.
Maclin, Tracey. "A comprehensive analysis of the history of interrogation law, with some shots
directed at Miranda v. Arizona." (2015): 1387-1423.
Stelfox, P. (2013). Criminal investigation: An introduction to principles and practice. Routledge.
Woody, W.D. (2019). The history, present, and future of police deception during interrogation.
In the Palgrave handbook of deceptive communication (pp. 727-746). Palgrave
Macmillan, Cham.
