confession. At point L, the investigator decides whether to ask the subject to
undergo a detection-of-deception examination to confirm the supposedly
limited nature of her involvement.
APPROACHES
The interview process outlined in this book involves three approaches built
around the kinds of questions asked. These three approaches—the
124
The Art of Investigative Interviewing
structured, semistructured, and nonstructured approaches—are illustrated in
the polyphasic flowchart in Chapter 9 (refer back to Figure 9.1).
The Structured Approach
The structured approach is used at the beginning of the interview and forms the
baseline for the investigator’s direct observation, evaluation, and assessment
of the interviewee. This approach begins at point A of the flowchart and
ends between points C and D. In this portion of the interview, the inves-
tigator asks basic fact-finding questions without accusation or intimidation.
These questions require less deep thought from the interviewee than those
asked during the semistructured and nonstructured modes. To encourage
the interviewee to respond, ask questions that she can answer easily. For this
purpose, I use routine questions such as the spelling of the interviewee’s
name, the number of years of schooling, and the type of work done in
the past.
The questions asked in the structured approach are not directly related to
solving the investigative problem. Instead they give the interviewee an oppor-
tunity to evaluate the investigator and to determine whether he will be treated
fairly. Everything the investigator does sends a signal to the interviewee. Every part of the investigator’s presentation encourages or discourages cooperation.
Certainly, if the interviewee is hostile by nature to everyone in authority or is determined to lie, little of what you do and say during the interview will make
any difference. Often, however, you can nudge reluctant interviewees into a
more compliant stance and eventually even nurture the guilty party into a
position to admit or confess to the incident.
At first, you can expect some delay in the interviewee’s responses. Do
not automatically consider this to be a significant indication of potential
deception. Note how clearly the interviewee answers the question; this will
help you determine the interviewee’s ability to handle more complex ques-
tions later in the interview. The structured portion of the interview is the
time to begin building rapport with the interviewee. The structured
approach can help establish the relative status of the interview participants
and assist in creating a secure feeling for both.
The Semistructured Approach
The semistructured approach begins at about point C of the flowchart. The
use of this approach implies your desire to receive information from inter-
viewees in an immediate way—that is, promptly and without rambling.
Setting, Location, Intensity, and Approach in the Interview
125
However, it does not imply the use of coercion, abuse, or intimidation.
Accusation and confrontation toward interviewees is not appropriate in this
mode. With the semistructured approach, try to tune into what is happening
moment by moment. You should be alert for signs that the truth is trying to
show itself. Look for patterns signaling deception.
The formulation of questions in the semistructured mode is not materi-
ally altered by the interviewee’s responses. The questions are partly intended
to stimulate the interviewee to exhibit verbal and nonverbal behavior that
may be indicative of deception. Follow the “bones” described in Chapter 9
in formulating your questions.
The Nonstructured Approach
At about point F or G of the interview interaction, you may decide to alter
your interview strategy and use specific review and persistent encourage-
ment to resolve inconsistencies in the interviewee’s story. You will usually
reach a strategic deduction while attempting to resolve inconsistencies. The
interviewee’s hostility or reluctance to provide truthful information might
ing point requires delicate handling. If you decide prematurely that the
interviewee is being deceptive and change your strategy abruptly, you might
spark greater reluctance on the part of the interviewee. Between points F
and H, after attempting to resolve inconsistencies, you may decide to clearly
proclaim your belief in the interviewee’s culpability and to begin an inter-
rogation. Proficient interrogators move smoothly and cleverly to help the
interviewee reveal the truth.
PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER
There is a clear relationship among the levels of intensity, the participant locations, and the three approaches used during the interview process. During the
first part of the interview, the investigator simultaneously uses the structured approach and the level-one intensity stage. As he begins to use the semistructured approach, the intensity increases to level two. Finally, as the investigator attempts to resolve inconsistencies in the interviewee’s story, he employs the
nonstructured approach and intensity levels three, four, and five.
When the participants are in the conversation location, the approach
ranges from structured to semistructured. Touching does not occur. The
intensity of review and encouragement stays in the general and minimal
ranges.
126
The Art of Investigative Interviewing
In the moderate location, intensity levels one, two, and three are used.
The distance between the interview participants varies with the intensity of
the interaction. When using levels one and two, the investigator maintains a
distance of about four feet from the interviewee. With level three, the dis-
tance between participants is about four feet. From points C to G on the
polyphasic flowchart (refer back to Figure 9.1), the participants are about
four feet apart; from G to J, two to four feet; and from J to K, about two
feet. Reassuring touch is not used with levels one and two, but it can be
employed with level three at a distance of about two feet. In the moderate
location, the semistructured and nonstructured approaches are used to for-
mulate questions. Between points F and G, the investigator might announce
that there appear to be inconsistencies in the information that the inter-
viewee has provided.
The intimate location is used with intensity level four. The investigator
uses this location to comfort or confront. Intimate implies closeness between
participants that might strengthen rapport and stimulate greater cooperation.
Confrontations about inconsistencies take place in this location, as do the
beginnings of interrogation.
REVIEW QUESTIONS
1. What is a key consideration in selecting an interview location?
2. What is personal space, and what might happen if you invade an inter-
viewee’s personal space?
3. What is proxemics, and why is it important?
4. What are the three locations, and how are they used in the interview
process?
5. Name
two uses for the intimate locations.
6. How can you use review and encouragement strategically to uncover
the truth?
7. What is the objective of using the various intensity levels of review and
encouragement?
8. Is it appropriate to use tactics involving bullying or coercion at the
highest intensity level?
9. When should you challenge inconsistencies?
10. What is the goal of the structured approach, and what types of ques-
tions are appropriate?
11. When is the semistructured approach used?
12. When does a turning point in strategy occur?
11
CHAPTER
Questioning Techniques
Interviewing is best done face to face. In the complex interaction that takes
place during an interview, observations are made by both participants as they
check and recheck each other’s verbal and nonverbal behavior. There is a
mutual analysis: The interviewee is scrutinizing the investigator for signs
of believability while being observed for patterns of deception. Seasoned
interviewers know that luck is merely what is left over after careful planning
and preparation. They develop a plan for each interview but remain flexible
when applying it. They help interviewees rationalize and save face, thus
encouraging their cooperation.
It is worth remembering that when someone is being interviewed, she is
likely going to undergo stress, even if in minimal amounts. As difficult as it
may be for you, finding a way to portray yourself as kind and gentle may
pay off with big rewards. It is important to be empathetic while remaining
curious and interviewing with purpose. Your questions need to be objective,
thorough, relevant, and accurate. Proficient interviewers have a keen sense of
observation, resourcefulness, and persistence as well as a tireless capacity for work. They also use common sense. Acting stern, imperious, or harsh will
not help your interview. Be guided by your intuition, not guesses or specu-
lations, but be sure your intuition is based on your direct observation and
immediate experience. Be prepared to interview without conveying pressure
or suggestion, and encourage the interviewee to provide a narrative account of
their statement. Ask the interviewee to recall everything related to this particular case, observed or known. It is always better to interview witnesses as soon as possible after an incident, so that they can give a more accurate report.
Interviewing and interviewing techniques have changed tremendously
over the past 10 years, specifically in regard to the way witnesses and suspects are interviewed. Years ago interviews were primarily confrontational,
whereas now we hope to get the interviewee to be cooperative, producing
a meaningful interview.
Unobtrusively direct the interview, deciding when to listen, when to talk,
what to observe, and so on. In so doing, observe, evaluate, and assess the interviewees, including what they say both verbally and nonverbally, how they say
what they say, and what they fail to say. The plausibility of a witness’s obser-
vation is critical to the overall investigation; therefore, consider the ability of 127
128
The Art of Investigative Interviewing
each interviewee to see and hear what was reportedly observed. With overly
talkative interviewees who ramble or with those who tend to wander from the
topic, gently and empathically guide them back, redirecting them through
leading questions to a discussion of the issue at hand.
Interviewees provide opinions wherever and whenever they can; it is
your job to distinguish true factual information from opinionated, emotional
comments. Separate observations from interpretations, facts from feelings. If
you notice interviewees interpreting facts rather than presenting observed
details, avoid being judgmental and pouncing on them. Without pressure
or suggestion, encourage them to provide a narrative of their observations
regarding the investigative problem. Avoid knowingly bringing into your
inquiry any biases or prejudices that might lead to misguided observations
and improper evaluation.
QUESTION FORMULATION
Interviewers succeed when they convince their subjects to provide truthful
information. It’s not a matter of telling but rather of selling. Well-crafted
questions can sell the interviewee on the idea of telling the truth. You need
to be a persuader of sorts, using properly phrased questions in a setting and
under circumstances that persuade the interviewee to answer honestly.
Questions encourage compliance when their design is simple. Make them
more specific and complex only after evaluating the interviewee’s responses.
Aristotle said, “Think as wise men do, but speak as the common people do.”
Ask questions spontaneously to express ideas in a natural and subconscious
manner. Trust yourself to ask properly worded questions while encouraging
the subject to cooperate. When appropriate, make your questions specific,
definite, and concrete. Vague, general questions permit interviewees to wig-
gle and squirm away from your desired goal.
Choose your words with care. Words represent partial images, not the
total picture. Avoid legal-sounding terms like homicide, assault, and embezzle-
ment. Misused, these words tend to make interviewees unnecessarily defen-
sive. Interviewees welcome the opportunity to respond to questions for
which they know the answers, and they feel freer to talk when the topic
is familiar. Interview suspects tend to avoid answering questions that make
them appear dumb, foolish, or uninformed. When embarrassed or upset
over a question, interviewees avoid eye contact and may display signs of dis-
tress. Some people appear shifty-eyed when they are lying, are planning to
lie, or have been asked to reveal private information about themselves.
Questioning Techniques
129
QUESTION PRESENTATION
A question is a direct or implied request for the interviewee to think about a
particular matter. Comments based on assumptions can be regarded as ques-
tions if they invite the interviewee to respond. Rather than rely on many
questions, allow the interviewee to speak freely. Some interviewees elabo-
rate more readily when asked fewer questions. Once an interviewee decides
to talk, you often need only guide the discussion with timely encourage-
ment. Your assumptions, behavior, and method of questioning will, to some
extent, determine the interviewee’s response and willingness to cooperate.
Even your vocabulary could cause embarrassment or fright. Interviewees
who lose face because they don’t understand your words may become dis-
turbed or insulted, they may feel naked and vulnerable, and they may
become judgmental and skeptical (Berne, 1974; Harris, 1973; I Understand,
You Understand). Their resentment may cause them to fail to think clearly, to
refuse to cooperate, or even to lie. On the other hand, some interviewees
will be extremely cooperative in trying to answer all questions, even with
an interviewer who asks poorly phrased questions based on crude, biased
assumptions. By initiating the question- answer pattern, you tell inter-
vi
ewees as plainly as if put into words that you are the authority, the expert,
and that only you know what is important and relevant. This may humiliate
some interviewees who regard such a pattern as a third-degree tactic. There-
fore, phrase your questions carefully, and be sensitive enough to realize
when not to ask questions. Noticing the sincerity of your tone of question-
ing and how you avoid asking abrasive, leading questions, interviewees will
feel less need to be defensive.
Question objectively. Avoid giving the impression that you have taken
sides in the investigation. This may be difficult for interviewers who repre-
sent certain organizations, such as law enforcement agencies. Avoid looking
surprised or shocked at any statement an interviewee makes.
Regard the interview as a conversation, not a cross-examination. “Do not
grill the interviewee as a prosecuting attorney might do. Ask questions in a conversational manner, because your purpose is to hold a conversation with some-
one who has knowledge or has experienced something that you want to know
about. Holding a conversation implies a certain amount of give-and-take dur-
ing the interview. Your goal is to ask questions that are productive, yielding
information. Try to avoid making statements that do not illicit an answer.
Never ask questions in a belligerent, demeaning, or sarcastic manner.
Questions that begin “Isn’t it true that you . . .” tend to be abrasive and
130
The Art of Investigative Interviewing
promote defensiveness. Pushing interviewees into a corner where they will
have to defend themselves is self-defeating. Do not embarrass interviewees
by asking questions that they cannot answer. This will only make them
uneasy and will create unnecessary tension. Similarly, asking questions
accusingly, suspiciously, or abruptly or asking “trick questions” may arouse
fear and defensiveness and will not promote cooperation. All of these tactics
are counterproductive.
To emphasize your genuine interest in the details the interviewee has
provided and to promote a positive view of your thoroughness, review
all details during questioning. This will allow coverage of more specific areas