The Reid Technique – A Two-Phase Process

Phase One: A Non-Confrontational Investigative Interview

John E. Reid and his colleague, Northwestern Professor of Law Fred E. Inbau, developed the non-confrontational interview as an integral part of any questioning of a subject in the 1960’s.

In the second edition of the Reid, Inbau book, Criminal Interrogation and Confessions, published in 1967, the authors recommended that during the interview process the investigator should “assume a neutral position and refrain from making any statement or implications one way or the other until the subject discloses some information or indications pointing either to his innocence or his guilt.”

We have taught investigators for decades that 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

Phase Two: The Interrogation

Interrogation should only be conducted when the investigator is reasonably certain of the subject’s involvement in the commission of the crime. The purpose of an interrogation is to learn the truth.

• 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.

Oftentimes, defense lawyers, false confession “experts,” academicians, and reporters claim that the Reid Technique starts by accusing the subject of committing the crime that is under investigation. As described above, that is an absolutely false statement.