PRELIM MODULE

THREE TOOLS OF INVESTIGATION

THE THREE TOOLS OF INVESTIGATION

 INFROMATION
The knowledge or facts which the investigators had gathered from persons or
documents, which are pertinent or relevant concerning the commission of the crime or
criminal activities.
All evaluated materials of every description including those derived from
observation, reports, rumors, imagery, and other sources from which intelligence in
produced.
Information is a communicated knowledge by others obtaining by personal study,
investigation, research, analysis, observation. The use of modern gadgets in intelligence
and other things and material that possess or contain a desire information or knowledge.

CLASSIFICATION OF INFORMATION AS TO SOURCES:

a. REGULAR SOURCES
 Information were taken from records, files from the government or non-
government agencies, and news items.
 The bulk of application of this nature are new items example:
o TV broadcast
o Intercepted radio
o Telephone messages
o Stored computer area/data
b. CULTIVATED SOURCES
 Information are furnished by INFORMANT or INFORMERS.
Informants (Asset) – people selected as sources of information, which could be
voluntary, or in consideration of a price.
 Informant – refers to a person who gives information to the police
voluntarily or involuntarily without any consideration
 Informer – those who give information to the police for price or
reward

c. GRAPEVINES SOURCES
 Information disclosed by the underworld characters such as prisoners or
ex-convicts.

TWO GENERAL CLASSIFICATIONS OF SOURCES OF INFORMATION:

This Module is prepared by:

Phoebe A. Calupit, RCrim
Instructor
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.02

1. Open Sources – 99% of the info collected are coming from open sources. (Overt
Intelligence– is the gathering of information or documents procured openly without regard as
to whether the subject or target become knowledgeable of the purpose)
Open Sources: Includes information taken from
Enemy activity – POW – Civilians - Captured documents
Map - Weather, forecast, studies, report - Agencies

2. Close Sources – 1% of info from close sources. (Covert Intelligence – is the secret
procurement of information, which is obtained without the knowledge of the person or persons
safeguarding vital intelligence interest.)
Close Sources: are information usually taken through:
Surveillance
Casing
Elicitation
Surreptitious entry
Employment of technical means (Bugging and Tapping device)
Tactical Interrogation
Observation and Description

PERSONS AS SOURCES OF INFORMATION

 Informant Net – It is a controlled group of people who worked through the

direction of the agent handler. The informants, principal or cutouts supply the
agent handler directly or indirectly with Intel information
 Informants (Asset) – people selected as sources of information, which could be
voluntary, or in consideration of a price.
 Informant – refers to a person who gives information to the police
voluntarily or involuntarily with out any consideration
 Informer – those who give information to the police for price or reward

Types of Informants
1. Criminal Informant – an informant who give information to the police
pertaining to the underworld about organized criminals with the
understanding that his identity will be protected
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.03

2. Confidential Informant – is similar to the former but he gives information

violate of the law to includes crimes and criminals
3. Voluntary Informant – a type of informant who give information freely and
willfully as a witness to a certain act
4. Special Informant – those who gives information concerning specialized
cases only and it is regarded a special treatment by the operatives (ex.
teachers, businessmen)
5. Anonymous Informant – those who gives information through telephone
with the hope that the informant cannot be identified

Sub-type of Informant
1. Incidental Informant – a person who casually imparts information
to an officer with no intention of providing subsequent information
2. Recruited Informant – A person who is selected cultivated and
developed into a continuous source of information

Categories of Recruited Informants:

1. Spontaneous or Automatic Informant – Informants who by the nature
of their work or position in society have a certain legal, moral or ethical
responsibilities to report info to the police
2. Ordinary run of the Mill Informants – Informants that are under the
compulsion to report info to the police
3. Special Employee – informants who are of a specific operational nature

INFROMANT RECRUITMENT

1. Selection – it is particularly desirable to be able to identity and recruit an

informant who has access to many criminal in-group or subversive organization. Wide
access is probably the single most important feature in the consideration of recruiting the
potential informant

2. Investigation – the investigation of the potential informants that has tentatively

identified as a “probable” must be as thorough as possible. It must establish possible
existing motives as to this person might assist the police Intel community. Failure to do
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.04

so will deny this office who must perform the approach and persuasion phase with little
more that a guess. If necessary, conduct complete background investigation (CBI)

3. Approach – approach must be done in a setting from which might include

pleasant surroundings, perhaps a confidential apartment, completely free form any
probability of compromise, preferably in an adjacent city or a remote area foreign to the
informants living pattern.

4. Testing – the testing program should begin, of course, with the limited
assignment, with a gradual integration into the more important areas. The occasional
testing of an informant should continue through the entire affiliation

 INTERVIEW AND INTERROGATION

INTERVIEW IN GENERAL

An interview is the questioning of a person believed to possess knowledge that

is in official interest to the investigator.

IMPORTANCE OF INTERVIEW.
Interview in crime investigation is very important considering that the person
interviewed usually gives his account of an incident under investigation or offers
information concerning a person being investigated in his own manner and words.
Basic Assumptions:
 Nobody has to talk to law enforcers.
 No law compels a person to talk to the police if he does not want to.
 Therefore, people will have to be persuaded, always within legal and
ethical limits, to talk to law enforcers. This makes interviewing an art:

GENERAL KINDS OF INTERVIEWS

PRELIM
MODULE Pg.05

1. COGNITIVE INTERVIEW
This is conducted to willing and cooperative witnesses, where they are given the
full opportunity to narrate their accounts without intervention, interruption and
interference from them interviewer. After the subject finished his’/her narration, the
investigator now subjects him/her to the style of direct examinations and cross
examination, to clarify the unexplained portions to arrive at a vivid and complete picture
of the testimony.

2. QUESTION AND ASNWER

This interview as practiced by some investigator requires the interviewers to
answer the questions posed by the investigator. The interviewee is required to answer on
what he/she knows about what is being asked. In the case of subjects of low level of
intelligence, the use of leading questions greatly helps the investigator to obtain the full
and desired information.

TYPES OF WITNESS
1. Know-nothing Type.
This is a reluctant type of witness. It is found among the uneducated and of low
level of intelligence. The technique to be applied is to be with their level of intelligence
and by interrogation.
2. Disinterested Type.
This refers to an uncooperative and indifferent subject. To deal with this type is
to find out his/her field of interest so that he/she will talk. His/her indifference should be
demolished to arouse interest or be flattered instead.
3. The Drunken Type.
The style of questioning by the investigator should be adapted to the psychology
of the subject. When the drunken subject has sobered, another interview will be
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.06

conducted, confronting him/her about disclosures while in the state of drunkenness. The
written statement must be taken during his/her sobriety.
4. Talkative Type.
This is a witness who is prone to exaggerate, adding irrelevant or new matters to
their narration. The skillful investigator could prune the unnecessary matters from the
relevant ones.
5. Honest Witness.
This is the truthful and cooperative witness where the investigator could rely
upon, with little or no problem in handling them.
6 Deceitful Witness.
This is a liar type of witness. Let him/ her lie and order later to repeat several
times the narration. He/she will be enmeshed in contradictions. If possible the lies must
be tape recorded for the confrontation about the contradiction. Pressure him/her for
possible cases of perjury or obstruction of justice and he/she will tell the truth.
7. Timid Witness.
This is a shy witness. The approach must be friendly and reassuring
confidentiality of the information. It should be hidden from the devouring press by
interviews or photo sessions.
8. Refusal to Talk Witness.
This is the most difficult subject to deal with. Find out the reasons of his/her
personality such as: trauma, shock, fear, hatred, and others. Remove these fetters of
silence so that he/she will start talking (Garcia, 2004)]

The Person Interviewed

Consider:
a) His ability to observe.
b) His ability to remember
c) His ability to narrate.
d) His mental weakness because of stupidity or infancy
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.07

e) His moral weakness because of drunkeness, drug addiction, his being a

pathological liar or similar factors.
f) Emotional weakness resulted by family problems, hatred, revenue, and
love.

The Interviewer’s Personal Traits.

a) He must be a practical psychologist who understands the human psyche
and behavior.
b) He has a sincere interest in people. People who are reclusive generally
are not good interviewers.
c) He is clam, has self-discipline, and keeps his temper.
d) He is courteous, decent and sensitive.
e) He is self-assumed and professional. He is tactful, i.e. he knows what to
say when and how to say it.
f) He is cordial and agreeable, and never officious. But he should avoid
over-familiarity it.
g) He is forceful, persistent and patient. Some people just cannot be rushed.
h) He is analytical.
i) He is flexible and cautious.
j) He is a good actor and can conceal his own emotion.
k) He avoids third degree tactics and never deviates from the fundamental
principle that a person must be treated according to humanitarian and legal
precepts.
l) he keeps the rules of evidence in mind.

Planning the Interview.

In planning the interview, the interviewer should consider:
a) The facts of the case which have been established so far.
b) The information needed to complete the picture
c) The sources of information that may be consulted such as files and
records.
d) The possibility of confronting the suspect with physical evidence .
e) The time available for the interview.
f) The time allowed by law.
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.08

Preparation of the Interview

Before interviewing a witness, the law enforcer should mentally review the case
and consider what information the witness can contribute. If the case requires it, he
should acquaint himself with the background of the witness.

Time, Place and Surrounding Circumstance.

a) It is not always possible to fix the time and place of an interview, but
since memory is short, it is basic that an interview with the witness and
suspect(s) should take place as soon as possible after the commission of the
crime.
b) Interview of arrested person should be made as soon as possible after the
arrest.
c) Conduct interviews whenever possible in your own turf, i.e. your office.
d) Have an interview room where there will be privacy. It should be a plain
room but not bleak. There should be few furniture, and no distracting
pictures, calendars or similar items.
e) Arrange it so that there will be no interruption during the interview.
f) Suspects should be interviewed separately and out of sight and earshot
of each other.
g) If are two interviewers, let one man be the prime interviewer.
h) Arrange chairs so that window light falls on the interviewee and not on
the interviewer.
i) The interviewer should adapt his speech to the style best understood by
the subject. In dealing with tan uneducated subject, the interviewer should
use simple words and sentences.
j) Straight-back chairs should be used for both subject and interviewer.
Other types of chairs induce slouching or leaning back, and such position
are not conductive to proper interviews.
k) The interviewer should remain seated and refrain from pacing about the
room.

PHASES OF INTERVIEW
1. Preparation
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.09

Investigator must review the facts at the crime scene and information from other
sources in order that he/she would be ready for the questioning. A background of the
subject should be available so that he/she could adapt himself/herself to the kind of
approach to be employed.
2. Approach
This is done through investigator’s careful selection of the kind of approach to
use, which maybe a single kind, a combination of two or the application of all
techniques.
3. Warming Up
This is done by preliminary or exploratory questions to clear the atmosphere and
promote a conducive place for cordiality, respect and trust for each other.
4. Cognitive Interview
This is performed by allowing or already asking now the subject to narrate
his/her account without interruption, intervention or interference. It is only after the
completion of the uninterrupted narration that the investigator begins the direct and
cross examination.

Opening the Interview.

a) The interviewer should identify himself and the agency to which
he belongs.
b) He should try to size up the interviewee and reach to tentative
conclusion about his type, then use the best interview approach.
c) He should keep in mind the provisions of law regarding rights of
people under custodial investigation.

The Body of the Interview.

a) The interviewee should be allowed to tell his own story in his
own words without interruption.
(i) This allows for continuity and clearness.
(ii) Range of interview is broadened.
(iii) It helps the interviewee recall and relate evens in their proper
order.
b) Interviewer should keep to the point at issue and should not
wander too far from it.
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.10

c) Interviewer should be alert for hearsay information so he can

question the interviewee on the matter later.
d) Do not interrupt a trend of ideas by abruptly asking a question.
Use the uninterrupted account of the witness interview
e) However, you may guide the interviewee innocuous questions
such as, “And then what did you do?”

Questioning.
a) Dominate the interview. Be careful, do not allow the interviewee
to be the one asking the questions.
b) Do not ramble. Have a reason for every question asked.
c) Follow the order of time and bring out the facts in that order. This
technique is called “chronological questioning” and is considered the
easiest as people tend to think in terms of what happened first, the,
second, then third. The interviewer should go step by step in learning
all the details concerning the planning and commission of the crime
and what happened after it was committed.
d) Exhaust each topic before moving on to the next.
e) Determine the basis for each material statement. It might be a
hearsay.
f) Keep your questions simple and understandable. Avoid double-
edged or forked questions.
g) The dangers of leading and misleading questions should be borne
in mind. A question which suggests to the witness the answer which
the interviewer desires is a leading question. Questions which
assume material facts that have not been proven are misleading
questions.
h) Wait for the answer to one question before asking a second one.
i) Ask important questions in the same tone of voice as the
unimportant ones.
j) As a rule, avoid trick or bluffing questions.
k) Where it is necessary to inquire into the past history of the
interviewee involving something unpleasant, it is wise to use
introductory remarks deploring the need for the question and saying
that it is one of the unpleasant but necessary of an officer.
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.11

Closing
a) Before closing the interview, the law enforcer should make a
mental check of the purpose of the interview and should analyze
what he has learned, then decide whether he has attained his
objective. He should be guided in this respect by the 5 W’s and I H-
what, where, when who, why and how.
b) The interviewer should always the door open for a re-interview.
Don’t forget to say “THANK YOU” after the interview.

Note: Although the words “interview” and “interrogation” have similar

meanings, there are those who prefer to use “interview” when questioning
witness and informants, and “interrogation” when questioning suspects.

A Philosophy of Interview and Interrogation:

The RIGHT officer, Asking the RIGHT questions, In the RIGHT manner, At the
RIGHT time and in the RIGHT place, Will get the RIGHT answers.

INTERROGATION IN GENERAL

An interrogation is the questioning of a person suspected of having committed

an offense or of a person who is reluctant to make a full disclosure of information in his
possession which is pertinent to the investigation.
It is the vigorous and confrontational questioning of a reluctant suspect about
his/her participation in the commission of crime. It is confrontational in the sense that
the investigator places the guilt on the accused. This process could also be applied to
uncooperative or reluctant witness.

Purpose of Interrogation

a) To obtain information concerning the innocence or guilt of suspect.

b) To obtain a confession to the crime from a guilty suspect.
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.12

c) To induce the suspect to make admissions.

d) To know the surrounding circumstances of a crime.
e) To learn of the existence and location of physical evidence such as documents
or weapons.
f) To learn the identity of accomplices
g) To develop information which will lead to the fruits of the crime.
h) To develop additional leads for the investigation
i) To discover the details of any other crime in which the suspect participated.

WHAT IS THE MAIN PURPOSE OF INTERROGATION?

The main intention of interrogation is to OBTAIN CONFESSION OR

ADMISSION FROM THE SUSPECT AND TO LEARN RELEVANT
INFORMATION FROM UNCOOPERATIVE WITNESS.
When the accused confessed to the commission of a crime, he/she accepts the
facts constituting the offense but if he/she interposes self-defense or other exculpatory
grounds, then the acknowledgment is not confession but admission.

a. Confession
Is a direct acknowledgement of the truth of the guilty fact as charged or of some
essential part of the commission of the criminal act itself.
1. The statement obtained by urging or request was a spontaneous or self-
induced utterance of the accused.
2. The statement was obtained without coercion and free from any force or
intimidation.
3. The statement was obtained during an official investigation after the accuse
was informed of the nature of the offense, of the fact that he need not make a statement,
and of the fact the evidence can be used against him at a trial.

Effects of CONFESSION
a. May be given in evidence against him in the investigation or trial of the offense with
which he is charge.
b. May be given to prove the guilt of his companions but it will pass lots of court
argumentation and deliberations.
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.13

TYPES OF CONFESSION
1. Judicial confession- confession done in the court.
During arraignment or any stage of the proceeding. The plea of guilt
maybe made during arraignment or any stage of the proceeding where the
accused changes plea of not guilty to guilty. This is conclusive upon the court
and may be considered to be mitigating circumstances to criminal liability.

Sec. 2, Rule of Court affirmed that:

“Judicial admission is made by the party in the pleadings, or in
the course of the trial or other proceedings do not require proof and
cannot be contradicted unless previously shown to have been made
through palpable mistakes”.

2. Non- judicial confession or extra- judicial confession- called "out of court',

this kind of confession is inadmissible in court unless corroborated by proof of
corpus delicti.

KINDS OF CONFESSION

1. VOLUNTARY CONFESSION
For the purpose of the confession, the accused speaks of his free will and
accord, without inducement of any kind, with all a full and complete knowledge
of the nature and consequences of the confession, and when the speaking is free
from influences affecting the will of the accused, at the time the confession was
made, that it renders it admissible in evidence against him.

2. INVOLUNTARY CONFESSION
Those confession obtained through, from threat, intimidation, duress ir
anything that influence the act of the confessor.

3. ADMISSION
A voluntary acknowledgment in express terms or by implication, by a
party in interest or by another whose statement he is legally bound, against his
interest, of the existence or truth of a fact in dispute materials to the issue.
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.14

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CONFESSION AND ADMISSION

CONFESSION ADMISSION
There is a declaration of the person There is a statement of the person
(accused). (accused)
The person only agreed on facts or
The accused acknowledged the guilt
circumstances of the crime
Guilt is admitted There is no acceptance of guilt

Is admission made in a judicial proceeding?

Thus Sec 4, Rule 129, of the Revised Rules of Court, expressly provides: -"An
admission, verbal or written made by a party in the course of the proceedings in the same case
does not require proof"
To the layman, confession and admission are words of similar import, but to the
investigator, both have wider spectrum and connotation.
More so with the stringent procedural safeguards enshrine under the 1987 Constitution.
Thus, there is an empirical need to know the textual interpretation and jurisprudence of section
12 (3), Art 3 of the 1987 constitution to guide law enforcers in the intricate arena of investigation,
which provides:
“Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or section 17 hereof shall be
inadmissible as evidence against him.”
Section 3 likewise, provides:
"No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself".
While the afore-quoted proviso evokes myriad of questions and quizzical eyebrows
among law enforcers, however, it would be a wrong notion to conclude that it puts the premium
on crime and will terrorize peace officers through fear of themselves violation the law
This bring to focus that the legal requirements now are more stringent and precise than
the celebrated Miranda Doctrine. (Miranda versus Arizona, 34 vs 436, 16 L.Ed. 2d 694). It should
be noted that the purpose is not to coddle wrong-doers protect the guilty, but the constitution
seeks to redress the unequal contest between an individual and the enormous power of the
government in search for truth and justice which is the bedrock of civilized society.
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.15
At this juncture, it is of an essence to quote the leading jurisprudence behind the rational
of the provision. In the case of People Vs Vargas, the court ruled, the imposition in the New
Constitution of an additional safeguard against extraction of Confession is a recognition of an
already prevalent practice in Custodial interrogation that has tarnished the image of the police
investigator and which is sought to be erased the aforesaid constitutional safe guard. In the
latest ruling under GR. 69210, dated July 9, 1989, the Supreme Court ruled that lawyers should
never prevent a person from freely and voluntarily telling the truth
EFFECT OF CONFESSION
1. Maybe be given in evidence against him in the investigation or trial of the offender
with which he is charged.
2. Maybe given to prove the guilt of his companions but it will pass a lot of court
argumentation and deliberation.

WHEN IS CONFESSION INADMISSABLE?

No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. Any person under
the investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be informed of
his right to remain silent and to have a competent and independent counsel preferably
of his choice. If he cannot afford the services of the counsel, he must be provided with
one for free.
This right cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of his counsel.
No force, violence, threat or intimidation or any other means which vitiate the free will
shall be used against him.

Preliminary Conduct.
The interrogator should identify himself at the outset and state in general the
purpose of the interrogation. He must advise the suspect of his rights against self-
incrimination and inform him that he does not have to answer questions and that, if he
does answer, these answers can be used as evidence against him. He must inform the
suspect of his right to counsel and that a state appointed counsel will be made available
without cost to him if he so desires. No questioning of the suspect unless the latter has
definitely waived his right to be silent. Ordinarily the investigator should be alone with
the suspect and, of course, the latter’s lawyer, if he has requested counsel.
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.16

The Interrogation Room

The room should provide freedom from distractions. If should be designed
simply to enhance the concentration of both the interrogation and the subject on the
matter under questioning.

Interrogation Techniques
The following are some of the techniques practiced by experienced investigators:
a) Emotional Appeals
– Place the subject in the proper frame of mind. The investigator should
provide emotional stimuli that will prompt the subject to unburden himself by
confiding. Analyze the subject’s personality and decide what motivation would
prompt him to tell the truth, then provide those motives through appropriate
emotional appeals.
b) Sympathetic Approach
– The suspect may feel the need for sympathy or friendship. He is
apparently in trouble. Gestures of friendship may win his cooperation.
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.17

c) Kindness
– The simplest technique is to assume that the suspect will confess if he
is treated in a kind and friendly manner.
d) Extenuation
– The investigator indicates he does not consider his subject’s
indiscretion a grave offense.
e) Shifting the Blame
– The interrogator makes clear his belief that the subject is obviously
not the sort of person who usually gets mixed up in a crime like this. The
interrogator could tell from the start that he was not dealing with a fellow who
is a criminal by nature and choice. The trouble with the suspect lies in his little
weakness – he like liquor, perhaps, or he is excessively fond or girls or he has
had a bad run of luck in gambling.
f) Mutt & leff
– Two (2) agents are employed. Mutt, the relentless investigator, who is
not going to waste any time because he knows the subject, is guilty. Jeff, of the
other hand, is obviously a king-hearted man.

CRIMINAL INTERROGATION SYSTEMS

Types of Offenders and Approaches to be used in Dealing With Them:

a) Emotional Offenders have a greater sense of morality. They easily feel remorse over
what they have done. The best approach in interrogating this type of offender is the
sympathetic approach.
b) Non-Emotional Offenders normally do not feel any guilt, so the best way to
interrogate them is through the factual analysis approach, that is, by reasoning with the
subject and letting him know that his guilt has already been, or will soon be, established.

Interrogation of Suspect Whose Guilt is Definite or Reasonably Certain

a) Maintain an attitude that shows that you are sure of yourself when you conclude
that the subject is indeed guilty.
(i) Don’t be very friendly with the subject and do not offer a handshake.
(ii) At the outset, accuse the subject of lying. If he reacts with anger, this usually
indicates innocence. But if he remains calm, you can generally conclude that your
suspicion of guilt confirmed.
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.18

(iii) Interruption of questioning by the subject may indicate innocence. Silence is

equated is equated with guilt.
(iv) Do not allow the subject to repeatedly deny his guilt.
(v) Assume that the subject is guilty and proceed to ask why he committed the act,.
(vi) When interrogating a “big shot,” it may be useful to lower his status by
addressing him by his first name, instead of using a title of respect.
(vii) Remember that one who is trained in criminal interrogation is easier to question
than an ordinary criminal since he ahs less confidence in himself as a liar.
b) The subject should be made aware of the fact that the interrogator knows
information indicating his guilt and that the interrogator is not merely “fishing” for
evidence.
c) Let the subject know that he is showing signs of deception, some of which are:
(i) Pulsation of the carotid (neck) artery
(ii) Excessive activity of the Adam’s apple
(iii) Avoiding the eyes of the interrogator, swinging one leg over the other foot
wiggling, wringing of the hands, tapping of fingers, picking fingernails, etc.
(iv) Dryness of the mouth
(v) Swearing to the truthfulness of assertions. Guilty subjects to strengthen their
assertions of innocence frequently use this.
(vi) “Spotless Past Record” – “Religious Man.” These are asserted to support
statements, which the subject knows, and realizes the interrogator knows, to be false.
(vii) A “Not That I Remember” or “As Far As I Know” expression should be treated
as a veiled admission or half-truth.
d) Sympathize with the subject by telling him that anyone else under similar
conditions or circumstances might have done the same thing.
e) Reduce the subject’s guilt feeling by minimizing the moral seriousness of his
offense.
f) In order to secure the initial admission of guilt, the interrogator should suggest
possible reasons, motives or excuses to the subject.
g) Sympathize with the subject by:
(i) Condemning his victim. During the questioning, the interrogator
should develop the notion that the initial blame, or at least some the blame,
for the crime rests upon the victim.
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.19

(ii) Condemning the subject’s accomplice. But the interrogator must

be cautious so that the subject as leniency or exculpation from liability
does not misinterpret his comments.
(iii) Condemning anyone else upon whom some degree of moral
responsibility might be placed for the commission of the crime.
h) In encouraging the subject tot ell the truth display some
understanding and sympathy.
(i) Show sympathy through a pat on the shoulder (usually reserved
for men who are either younger that or of the same age as the interrogator,
or emotional offenders), or gripping the subject’s hand. Care must be taken
with female offenders, who might consider any physical contact with the
interrogator as a sexual advance.
(ii) Tell the subject that even if he was your own brother (or any other
close relative), you would still advise him to speak the truth.
(iii) Convince the subject tot ell the truth for his own moral or mental
well being
(iv) The “friendly-unfriendly” act. This is much like the Mutt and Jeff
system discussed earlier. The only difference is that this act seems more
effective if done by a single interrogator playing both roles.
i) Point out the possibility of exaggeration on the part of the accuser or victim or
exaggerate the nature and seriousness of the offense itself.
j) Early in the interrogation, have the subject situate himself at the scene of the
crime or in some sort of contact with the victim or the occurrence.
k) Seek an admission of lying about some incidental aspect of the occurrence by
achieving this, the subject loses a great deal of ground, bringing him nearer to the
confession stage, because he can always be reminded by the interrogator that he has not
been telling the truth.
l) Appeal to the subject’s pride well-selected flattery or by a challenge to his honor.
Flattery is especially effective on women subjects.
m) Point out the uselessness of lying.
n) Point out to the subject the grave consequences and futility of a continuation of
his criminal behavior.
o) Rather than seek a general admission of guilt, first ask the subject a question
regarding some detail of the offense, or inquire as to the reason for its commission.
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.20

p) When co-offenders are being interrogated and the previously described

techniques have been ineffective, play one against the other. This is effective because
when two or more persons have collaborated in the commission of a criminal offense
and are later apprehended for questioning, there is usually a constant fear on the part of
each participant that one of them will “talk,” in exchange for some leniency or clemency.

Interrogation of Suspect Whose Guilt is Uncertain

a) Ask the subject if he knows why he is being questioned.

b) Ask the subject to relate all he knows about the crime, the victim, and possible
suspects.
c) Obtain from the subject detailed information about his activities before, during
and after the occurrence under investigation. This is a good method of testing the
validity of the subject’s alibi.
d) Where certain facts suggestive of the subject’s guilt are known, ask him about
them rather casually and as though the real facts were not already known, to give the
subject an opportunity to lie. His answer will furnish a very good indication of his
possible guilt or innocence, and if he is guilty, his position becomes very vulnerable
when confronted with the facts possessed by the interrogator.
e) At various intervals, ask the subject certain pertinent questions in a manner,
which implies that the correct answers, are already known.
f) Refer to some non-existing incriminating evidence to determine whether the
subject will attempt to explain it; if he does, that is an indication of guilt.
g) Ask the subject whether he ever thought about committing the offense or one
similar to it. If the subject admits he had thought about committing it, this fact is
suggestive of his guilt.
h) In theft cases, if the suspect offers to make restitution, that fact is indicative of
guilt.
i) Ask the subject whether he is willing to take a lie-detector test. the innocent
person will almost always immediately agree to take practically any test to prove his
innocence, whereas the guilty person is more prone to refuse to take the test or to find
excuses for not taking it, or for backing out of his commitment to take it.
j) A subject who tells the interrogator, “All right, I’ll tell you what you want, but I
didn’t do it,” is, in all probability, guilty.
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.21

General Suggestions Regarding the Interrogation of Criminal Suspects

a) Interview the victim, the accuser, or the discoverer of the crime before
interrogating the suspect.
b) Be patient and persistent. Never conclude an interrogation at a time when you
feel discouraged and ready to give up; continue for a little while longer.
c) Make no promises when asked, “What will happen to me if tell the truth?” A
promise of leniency or immunity may induce an innocent to confess.
d) View with skepticism the so-called conscience-stricken confession.
e) When a subject has made repeated denials of guilt to previous investigators, first
question him, whenever circumstances permit, about some other, unrelated offense of a
similar nature of which he is also considered to be guilty.
f) An unintelligent, uneducated criminal suspect, with a low cultural background
should be interrogated on a psychological level comparable to that usually employed in
the questioning of a child.

Interrogation Witnesses and Other Prospective Informants:

a) Give the witness or prospective informant an assurance that the offender will not
harm him or any member of his family, and that there is a witness protection program
specially designed to meet that contingency when it becomes necessary.
b) If such witness or prospective informant refuses to cooperate with the police, try
to sever any bond between him and the offender, and proceed to interrogate the witness
or informant as if he were the suspect.
PRELIM
MODULE Pg.22

THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN INTERVIEW AND INTERROGATION

INTERVIEW INTERROGATION

A simple questioning of a person who Questioning somebody closely, often I an

cooperates with the investigator aggressive manner

It involves skillful questioning of hostile

witnesses and suspects
Witness voluntarily give their accounts Interrogation applies to an uncooperative
about the commission of the crime or reluctant witness
The purpose is to obtain admission of
confession.

INSTRUMENTATION IN GENERAL
The difference between
 CRIMINALISTICS
1. Scientific study and evaluation of physical evidence.
2. Science dealing with the detection of crime and the apprehension of
criminals.
 FORENSIC SCIENCE
- Practical application of any science (natural & others) to law
(commission of crime)
 INSTRUMENTATION
- Application of the instruments & methods of physical sciences