PART ONE: The Reid Technique: The Benchmark for Interrogation Safeguards

We don't just teach interview and interrogation techniques, we actively work with agencies to ensure that their interviews and interrogations are conducted professionally and ethically in accordance with the following Principles of Practice….

DO NOT ENGAGE IN ANY OF THESE BEHAVIORS

• Physical abuse of the subject
• Make threats of physical harming the subject
• Make threats of inevitable consequences
• Make promises of leniency
• Deny the subject any of their rights
• Denial the subject the chance to satisfy the physical needs
• Conduct excessively long interrogations
• Disclosure details about the crime
• Fail to properly take into account the subject’s mental limitations and/or psychological disabilities
• Fail to properly modify approaches with socially immature juveniles
• Fail to properly corroborate confession details

Instead…….FOLLOW THE REID PRINCIPLES OF PRACTICE

• Do not make any promises of leniency
• 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
• Conduct an interview before any interrogation. Absent a life-saving circumstance, the investigator should conduct a non-accusatory interview before engaging in any interrogation
• Conduct an interrogation only when there is reasonable certitude that the suspect committed the offense under investigation or is withholding relevant information
• Attempt to verify the suspect's alibi before conducting an interrogation
• When interrogating a non-custodial suspect, do not deprive the suspect from his freedom to leave the room
• Do not conduct excessively long interrogations.
• When a suspect claims to have little or no memory for the time period when the crime was committed, the investigator should not lie to the suspect concerning incriminating evidence
• Electronically record the interview and interrogation
• Given current judicial and legislative trends regarding the use of deception during an interrogation, investigators should adopt a general practice of avoiding misrepresentations concerning incontrovertible or dispositive evidence

For decades the Reid Technique Principles of Practice have set the standard for conducting proper investigative interviews and interrogations - Protecting the Innocent and Identifying the Guilty.

The Reid Technique is confession-focused

The Reid Technique always begins with a non-accusatory, information-gathering investigative interview.

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 essential element to evaluate during an investigative interview is whether or not the case facts and evidence support the subject’s story or contradict what the subject has stated.
• For example, if the subject states that he was not at the victim’s home on the day of the murder, but video from the apartment building across the street shows him entering the subject’s home on the day of the murder, the fact that he lied about that outweighs any verbal, paralinguistic or nonverbal behavioral responses that he might make during the interview.
• 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 take place when the information developed during the interview and the investigation clearly indicate the subject’s probable involvement in the commission of the crime.

The Reid Technique teaches investigators to lie about the case evidence.

In 1969, the United States Supreme Court upheld the use of misrepresenting evidence to the subject. The case was Frazier v. Cupp (394 U.S. 731). In that case, the Supreme Court upheld the admissibility of the defendant’s confession, which, in part, was the result of the police falsely telling the subject that his accomplice had confessed. The Court held that the misrepresentations were relevant, but that they did not make an otherwise voluntary confession inadmissible. In reaching this conclusion, the Court judged the materiality of the misrepresentation by viewing the “totality of circumstances.”

It is important to highlight the Court’s reference to an “otherwise voluntary confession,” the clear implication being that if the subject’s rights were honored; if there were no threats of harm or inevitable consequences; if there were no promises of leniency; and if the investigator followed the guidelines established by the courts, then misrepresenting evidence, in and of itself, will not jeopardize the admissibility of the confession.

Reid Policy Recommendations

• Investigators should consider the impact that misrepresenting evidence to the subject may have on a jury’s or court’s perception of their credibility.
• Investigators should be sure to check with their local prosecutors as to their views and recommendations regarding misrepresenting evidence to a subject and should be familiar with court decisions in their jurisdiction on this issue. Specific prohibitions against the use of deception may vary within each jurisdiction.
• Investigators should not misrepresent any evidence to a suspect who acknowledges that he may have committed the crime even though he has no specific recollections of doing so.
• Investigators should not misrepresent any evidence when interrogating a youthful suspect with low social maturity or a suspect with diminished mental capacity or psychological disabilities.
• Investigators should never fabricate evidence or lie about potential leniency.
• Given current judicial and legislative trends regarding the use of deception during an interrogation, investigators should adopt a general practice of avoiding misrepresentations concerning incontrovertible or dispositive evidence.