INTERVIEW AND

INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES
Importance of Interrogation
◻ The Reid states that an interrogation “should only
occur when the investigator is reasonably certain of
the suspect's involvement in the issue under
investigation.” There are nine steps to the Reid
interrogation technique, briefly described below.
1. The positive confrontation. The investigator tells the
suspect that the evidence demonstrates the person's
guilt. If the person's guilt seems clear to the investigator,
the statement should be unequivocal.

2. Theme development. The investigator then presents a

moral justification (theme) for the offense, such as
placing the moral blame on someone else or outside
circumstances. The investigator presents the theme in a
monologue and in sympathetic manner.
3. Handling denials. When the suspect asks for permission to speak
at this stage (likely to deny the accusations), the investigator should
discourage allowing the suspect to do so. The Reid website asserts
that innocent suspects are less likely to ask for permission and more
likely to “promptly and unequivocally” deny the accusation. The
website states that “[i]t is very rare for an innocent suspect to move
past this denial state.”

4. Overcoming objections. When attempts at denial do not succeed,

a guilty suspect often makes objections to support a claim of
innocence (e.g., I would never do that because I love my job.) The
investigator should generally accept these objections as if they
were truthful, rather than arguing with the suspect, and use the
objections to further develop the theme.
5. Procurement and retention of suspect's attention. The
investigator must procure the suspect's attention so that
the suspect focuses on the investigator's theme rather
than on punishment. One way the investigator can do this
is to close the physical distance between himself or
herself and the suspect. The investigator should also
“channel the theme down to the probable alternative
components.”

6. Handling the suspect's passive mood. The investigator

“should intensify the theme presentation and concentrate
on the central reasons he [or she] is offering as
psychological justification . . . [and] continue to display
an understanding and sympathetic demeanor in urging
the suspect to tell the truth.”
7. Presenting an alternative question. The investigator should
present two choices, assuming the suspect's guilt and developed as
a “logical extension from the theme,” with one alternative offering
a better justification for the crime (e.g., “Did you plan this thing out
or did it just happen on the spur of the moment?”). The investigator
may follow the question with a supporting statement “which
encourages the suspect to choose the more understandable side of
the alternative.”

8. Having the suspect orally relate various details of the offense.

After the suspect accepts one side of the alternative (thus admitting
guilt), the investigator should immediately respond with a statement
of reinforcement acknowledging that admission. The investigator
then seeks to obtain a brief oral review of the basic events, before
asking more detailed questions.
◻ 9. Converting an oral confession to a written
confession. The investigator must convert the oral
confession into a written or recorded confession. The
website provides some guidelines, such as
repeating Miranda warnings, avoiding leading
questions, and using the suspect's own language.
◻ Interrogation – the systematic asking of questions to
elicit information in the minimum of time

◻ Interrogator – person who does the questioning

◻ Interrogee – any person who is subjected to the

interrogation process in any of its forms and phrases
◻ Suspect – any person believed to be associated
with prohibited activity
◻ Source – a person who for any reason submits
information of intelligence interest usually on a
voluntary basis
◻ Witness – any person who has direct knowledge of
facts concerning an event or activity
INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES

A. The “Open Techniques” – the interrogator is open and

direct in his approach and makes no attempts to conceal
the purpose of the interrogator. It is the best employed
when the interrogee is cooperative. It is frequently used
at the tactical level where time is a major interrogator.
B. The “Common Interest Technique” – the interrogator must
exert effort to impress the interrogee of their common
interest. The interrogator must look for he point out the
real advantages the interrogee will receive if he
cooperates
C. Record File (we know all technique) – the interrogator
prepare a file on the source listing all known information
(record should be padded to make it appear to be very
expensive).
◻ The information must contains the life history of the interrogee
to include his activities and known associates (Party-bio-data
of the interrogee is important).
◻ The “we know all” used in conjunction with the record file.

◻ During the approach, the interrogator may ask the interrogee

about a subject, if he refuses to cooperate, the interrogator
may provide the answer in order to impress him that the
interrogator knows him very wll (all is known).
D. Exasperation – techniques (harassment) – effectively
employed against hostile type interrogee. The interrogator
must be alert because the interrogee may fabricate
information to gain relief from irritation (monotype). Subject
interrogee is placed in a longer period of interrogation
without rest or sleep. The interrogator permits the source to
go to sleep. The interrogator permits the source to go to
sleep and subsequently awaken for another series of
questioning (this is done repeatedly). After many repetitions,
the interrogee will be exasperated and will finally cooperate
hoping that he can be allowed to rest or sleep. Ask a
question, listen to a reply and then ask the same question
repeatedly (use a tape recorder if possible). The purpose is
to bore the interrogee thoroughly until he begins to answer
questions freely to end the harassment.
E. Opposite Personality Technique – also know as
“Mutt and Jeff”, “Threat and Rescue,” “Bad Guy
and Good Guy”, “Sweet and Sour,” “Sugar and
Vinegar”, “Devil and Angel”.
◻ Use of two (2) interrogators playing opposite roles.
F. Egotist Techniques (Pride and Ego) – usually
successful when employed against an interrogee
who has displayed a weakness or a feeling of
insecurity. You may reverse the technique by
complementing the interrogee in hopes of getting
him to admit certain information to gain credit.
Described him as the best effective on the source
who have been looked down upon by his superior or
comrade.
G. “Silent Technique” – employed against nervous or
the confident type of interrogee.
◻ Look out the interrogee squarely in the eye with
sarcastic smile (Force him to break eye contact first).
He may ask questions but the interrogator must not
answer. Patience is needed. When the interrogator
is ready to break silence, he may do so with a
quietly and non-cholantly asked a question that the
interroge is sure of being a part of the subject.
H. “Questioning Barrage Technique” (Rapid Fire
Questioning) – intended to confuse the interrogee
and put him into a defensive position. The
interrogee become frustrated and confused, he will
likely reveal more than he intended, thus creating
opening for further questioning.