Reid technique
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article may contain original research or unverified claims. Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (November 2008) |
The Reid Technique is a method of meeting, conferring with, and evaluating, the subjects of an investigation. It involves three different components — factual analysis, interviewing, and interrogation. While each of these are separate and distinct procedures, they are interrelated in the sense that each serves to help eliminate innocent suspects during an investigation, thereby allowing the investigator to focus upon the person most likely to be guilty. Interrogating that individual then becomes foremost in the effort to learn the truth. Supporters argue the Reid Technique is useful in extracting information from otherwise unwilling suspects, while critics have charged the technique can elicit false confessions from innocent persons [1], especially children.[2] The use of the Reid Technique on youth is prohibited in Great Britain because of the incidence of false confessions and the wrongful convictions that result[citation needed].
The term "Reid Technique" is a registered trademark of the firm John E. Reid and Associates, which offers training courses in the method they have devised. The technique is widely used by law-enforcement agencies in North America
Contents |
[edit] Factual Analysis
Both an interview as well as an interrogation are facilitated by analysis of investigative findings. Proper factual analysis assists the investigator in the following ways:
- Eliminate improbable suspects
- Develop possible suspects or leads
- Increase confidence in identifying truthful or guilty suspects through the interview process
- Identify proper interrogation strategies
[edit] The Behavior Analysis Interview
The word "interview" refers to a non-accusatory question and answer session with a witness, victim or a suspect. In addition to standard investigative questions, structured "behavior provoking" questions are asked to elicit behavior symptoms from the person being interviewed which indicate either truth or deception. This structured procedure is referred to as a Behavior Analysis Interview (or BAI).
"Interrogation," on the other hand, is an accusatory process — accusatory only in the sense that the investigator tells the suspect that there is no doubt as to his guilt. The interrogation is in the form of a monologue presented by the investigator, rather than a question and answer format.
The actual demeanor of the investigator during the course of an interrogation is understanding, patient, and non-demeaning. His, or her, goal is to make the suspect progressively more and more comfortable with acknowledging guilt. This is accomplished by asking leading questions, whose answer/acceptance implies guilt on the part of the suspect.
The interrogation ends with an assumptive close in which the interrogator offers the suspect two alternate (but incriminating) explanations for his commission of the crime. This is a classic example of a false dilemma. One of the alternatives will be more socially acceptable to the suspect, based on his admissions during the BAI. Accepting either of the offered explanations proves guilt.
[edit] The Reid Technique's Nine Steps of Interrogation
The form of the interrogation is built around active persuasion by moral justification. The interrogator presents a monologue and discourages the suspect from denials or explanations. The interrogator leads the suspect progressively towards an admission by the use of alternative or contrasting questions. The interrogator offers the suspect two choices, one of which is less morally challenging than the other. If the suspect acknowledges a choice, the interrogation moves to non-leading questions to draw out the full confession. A critical part of the process is the development of information that will corroborate and substantiate the subject’s admission of guilt.
The identification of deceptive behaviors or symptoms in speech or body language is part of the Reid Technique.
- Step 1 - Direct Confrontation. Lead the suspect to understand that the evidence has led the police to the individual as a suspect. Offer the person an early opportunity to explain why the offence took place.
- Step 2 - Try to shift the blame away from the suspect to some other person or set of circumstances that prompted the suspect to commit the crime. That is, develop themes containing reasons that will justify or excuse the crime. Themes may be developed or changed to find one to which the accused is most responsive.
- Step 3 - Never allow the suspect to deny guilt. Reid training video: "If you’ve let him talk and say the words ‘I didn’t do it’, and the more often a person says ‘I didn’t do it’, the more difficult it is to get a confession."
- Step 4 - At this point, the accused will often give a reason why he or she did not or could not commit the crime. Try to use this to move towards the confession.
- Step 5 - Reinforce sincerity to ensure that the suspect is receptive.
- Step 6 - The suspect will become quieter and listen. Move the theme discussion towards offering alternatives. If the suspect cries at this point, infer guilt.
- Step 7 - Pose the “alternative question”, giving two choices for what happened; one more socially acceptable than the other. The suspect is expected to choose the easier option but whichever alternative the suspect chooses, guilt is admitted.
- Step 8 - Lead the suspect to repeat the admission of guilt in front of witnesses.
- Step 9 - Document the suspect's admission and have him or her sign a confession.
[edit] Notes
- ^ Kassin, Saul and Christina Fong: "'I'm Innocent!': Effects of Training on Judgments of Truth and Deception in the Interrogation room", Law and Human Behavior, Vol. 23 No. 5, 1999, page 499-516.
- ^ Beck, Susan: "Saving Anthony Harris", American Lawyer, The, Vol. XXXI No. 3 March 2009, page 76.
