When reporters have an agenda, they tend to leave out contrary facts.

In a recent article published in the Flatwater Free Press on July 9, 2026* describing the Reid Technique, the author completely misrepresents the Reid Technique process.

For example, the author states that in the 1966 case of Miranda v. Arizona case…... “The case cites the Reid Technique 10 times — never in a positive light.”

However, the author fails to mention that in June 2004, in the case of Missouri v. Seibert, the United States Supreme Court referenced our company and our book, Criminal Interrogation and Confessions, as an example of law enforcement resources that offered proper training regarding Miranda.

Furthermore, the author states that “A body of research now suggests that the Reid Technique,…. can prompt false confessions from suspects.”

There is no research that has found that the Reid Principles of Practice cause false confessions. To the absolute contrary, the Reid Core Principles of Practice help prevent false confessions.

Over many decades, the courts have identified that the primary causes and contributing factors for false confessions are the following:

• Physical abuse of the subject
• Threats of physical harm
• Threats of inevitable consequences
• Promises of leniency
• Denial of rights
• Denial of physical needs
• Excessively long interrogations
• Disclosure of crime details
• Failure to properly take in to account the subject’s mental limitations and/or psychological disabilities
• Failure to properly modify approaches with socially immature juveniles
• Failure to properly corroborate confession details

By adhering to the following Reid Principles of Practice, the possibility of a confession is essentially eliminated.

• Do not threaten the subject with any physical harm or inevitable consequences
• 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 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. Over the years, John E. Reid and Associates has assisted the Innocence Project (New York) on several cases as expert witnesses on proper interview and interrogation techniques, as well as the exoneration of one of their clients by obtaining a confession from the actual offender. This case was detailed in the story, “I Did It” in New York magazine (http://www.reid.com/pdfs/ididi...).

When false confession “experts” suggest that the Reid Technique causes false confessions, they cannot point to any such evidence: As an example, consider the Court’s comments in the case United States v. Jacques, 784 F. Supp. 2d 48 (2011):

“In sum, the proffered expert testimony to the effect that the Reid technique enhanced the risk of an unreliable confession lacked any objective basis for support, whatever. Although Professor Hirsch insisted that “there is a wealth of information about the risks of the Reid technique,” he could point to none.”

In a review of all 50-state Supreme Court and Appellate decisions and the District of Columbia that referenced the Reid Technique in a decision found that no state labelled the Reid Technique as coercive, illegal, prohibited, or that it violated due process.

It is common that when reporters have an agenda, they tend to leave out any information that contradicts their thesis.

* A famed police interrogation technique led to infamous false confessions in Nebraska. We still use it. J.J.Harder