Academicians Do Not Tell You the Whole Story

In a 2024 publication entitled Interview and interrogation methods and their effects on true and false confessions: A systematic review update and extension * the authors evaluated the effects of interrogation approaches on the rates of true and false confessions for “criminal suspects” from 29 studies. The “suspects” were typically college students from the United States who were assigned roles as “innocent” or “guilty” of committing a mock crime.

The various studies experimentally manipulated the interrogation approach - accusatorial, information-gathering, or direct questioning of the mock crime suspects who were suspected of wrongdoing.

The report describes that the interrogation methods evaluated were the Reid Technique, which the authors referred to “as the exemplar of the accusatorial approach,” the PEACE model and direct questioning.

The authors completely misrepresented the Reid Technique process. They stated that the Reid Technique begins with an assumption of guilt and goes on to say that, “Given the assumption of guilt, the goal of the interrogation is to obtain a confession from the suspect…..”

The authors completely omitted the fact that the Reid Technique, absent a life-saving circumstance, always begins with a non-accusatory investigative interview.

They are essentially saying that while the PEACE model and direct questioning procedures consist of essentially a question-and-answer conversation with the subject, the Reid Technique begins by accusing the subject of committing the crime that is under investigation. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In our training programs and publications, we teach and state the following regarding the Reid Technique process:

The initial contact with a subject (victim, witness or suspect) should be a non-accusatory, non-confrontational interview, the purpose of which is to develop information – to give the subject an opportunity to tell their story, and to provide any information they may have as to the who, what, when, where, why and how of the issue under investigation. This information can then be evaluated in relation to the available investigative facts and evidence.

• Throughout the interview, the investigator should maintain a neutral, objective fact-finder demeanor. During the interview, the investigator should not engage in any accusatory or confrontational behaviors.
• The interview should begin with casual conversation, biographical information, employment information, etc., to acclimate the subject to the interview process, develop rapport and develop the subject’s behavioral baseline
• The investigator should use open-ended questions to develop the subject’s statement, story, version of events, or explanation of what happened. In the interview, the investigator should do about 20% of the talking, and the subject should do about 80%.
• The investigator should evaluate the subject’s statement in conjunction with the case facts and evidence. If the subject offers an alibi, attempt to verify its authenticity.
• The investigator should evaluate the subject’s possible involvement in the issue under investigation based on the investigation, case facts, factual evidence and information developed during the interview/investigation

Interrogation should only be conducted when the investigator is reasonably certain of the subject’s involvement in the commission of the crime based on the information developed during the investigation and the interview. The purpose of an interrogation is to learn the truth. During an interrogation

• The investigator should always treat the subject with dignity and respect and should not make any promises of leniency, threats of harm or inevitable consequences, or physically abuse the subject
• The investigator should not deny the subject any of their rights or the opportunity to satisfy their physical needs
• The investigator should attempt to place the blame for what the suspect did on some person or set of circum­stances other than the suspect himself and build the subject up as “a good, honest hard-working person who made a mistake in judgment due to ……”
• When the subject acknowledges what they did, the investigator should ask open-ended questions to develop corroborating information – the location of the murder weapon or bloody clothes; how the subject gained entry into the building; where the subject sold the stolen jewelry, etc. Corroboration is an essential element to establish the authenticity of the subject’s statement.

Contrary to the statement in the article that the Reid process involves “the use of minimization (e.g., suggestions of leniency),” the absolute opposite is true. Furthermore, the article suggests that “assumptions of guilt” (which they attribute to the Reid Technique) can be problematic because interrogators are more likely to use coercive interrogation tactics on those they believe are guilty, potentially leading to false confessions.

Here are the Reid Technique Core Principles of Practice that we teach all investigators to follow in an effort to prevent false confessions:

• Do not make any promises of leniency

• Do not physically abuse the subject

• Do not threaten the subject with any physical harm or inevitable consequences

• Do not conduct interrogations for an excessively lengthy period of time

• Do not deny the subject any of their rights

• Do not deny the subject the opportunity to satisfy their physical needs

• Withhold information about the details of the crime from the subject so that if the subject confesses the disclosure of that information can be used to confirm the authenticity of the statement

• Exercise special caution when questioning socially immature juveniles or individuals with mental or psychological impairments

• Always treat the subject with dignity and respect

• The confession is not the end of the investigation – investigate the confession details in an effort to establish the authenticity of the subject’s statement

The article states that, “Theoretically, by changing the goal of an interview from obtaining a confession to eliciting investigative-relevant information, these techniques avoid the harmful actions associated with confirmation biases in interrogation settings (e.g., Scherr et al., 2020).”

The focus of the Reid Technique process is exactly that - to develop relevant investigative information.

* Mary Catlin, David B. Wilson, Allison D. Redlich, Talley Bettens, Christian A. Meissner, Sujeeta Bhatt, Susan E. Brandon

First published: 10 October 2024https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1441Digital Object Identifier (DOI)