Police interrogations.

[wired]

Theres a show on TV later this evening about police interrogations. Is anyone here a police interrogator type person? I know they talk confessions out of people over hours of grueling banter. Theyres a whole training thing behind it and all that but why do people do it. I mean sit there and get interrogated? They can leave at any time. Or shut up. With no attorney present at that telling them to shut up? My involvement in criminal justice being squat I just dont see what the motivation is. Do they think they can talk their way out of prosecution? I used to know a guy who swore he could get me to confess to anything and Im thinking no you can't because I can shut my mouth very effectively. Anyone know about this stuff?

Read More

 

[Xaevian]

Maybe.

 

[Bam]

Follow this guy's example…

View: https://youtu.be/jj1GUoSnAkc?si=oDlU9Bl5mHcbIV6v

 

[Stomper]

Duct tape and a rusty tablespoon are your friends.

 

[Xaevian]

Verbal Judo: Talk Your Way Through Confrontations

 

[Knobgoblin]

 

[pizzamike]

Manipulation and lying can get a lot out of people who don't want to talk. You just better hope they don't call your bluff and leave you looking like a clown.

 

[Ruger Rich]

Some folks just think they're smarter than the professionals.

 

[Knobgoblin]

The whole process is a trip. There are a fair number of people who have confessed to major crimes, including murder, who have absolutely nothing to do with it.
I think it's even crazier that most of eastern Europe relies heavily on lie detector results. No matter how much proof there is that they don't work as intended.

 

[Alexx1401]

It is really hard to understand the human mind. A LOT of people who end up in a shoot who get in a jam do so entirely on their mouth. As in they just can not shut up. It can be very strange to watch happen. This is of course FAR from just this situation. I see people all the time who when they end up in a situation where not talking is best just can not stop.

 

[Stomper]

It is really hard to understand the human mind. A LOT of people who end up in a shoot who get in a jam do so entirely on their mouth. As in they just can not shut up. It can be very strange to watch happen. This is of course FAR from just this situation. I see people all the time who when they end up in a situation where not talking is best just can not stop.

I don't answer questions. I want a lawyer, interview over.

 

[wired]

It is really hard to understand the human mind. A LOT of people who end up in a shoot who get in a jam do so entirely on their mouth. As in they just can not shut up. It can be very strange to watch happen. This is of course FAR from just this situation. I see people all the time who when they end up in a situation where not talking is best just can not stop.

Oh I can believe it. I used to interview 3-8 people a week for jobs. They get nervous and start blathering.

 

[Alexx1401]

Oh I can believe it. I used to interview 3-8 people a week for jobs. They nervous and start blathering.

That is a PRIME place I too have seen it. Talking to someone about a job and they just tank the whole process because they can not shut the hell up. Can be amazing to watch.
We just had to term 2 employee's at my second job this week over this. One got in some trouble, Wife bent over backward to help them. They went nuts with their mouth and while in the car with my wife even after being told the camera in the car was recording. That one not only got terminated they also are now red flagged for buying a gun or getting a carry permit.
Another employee got so over the top angry about this first one that they also ranted and got walked off today. Leaves me shaking my head in wonder some times.
The best part is I have zero doubt that both of these former employee's are now telling anyone they know how unfair it all was and how they were stellar employee's who got fired for nothing.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Control.
The interrogators have control over the situation...or at the very least appear to have control over it.
And the appearance of having something ...is just about as good as actually having it , in certain situations.

Proper use of information.
The interrogators go into an interrogation with knowledge of the crime and the suspect.
They may not know everything..but at times , you may not have to know everything ...
Again appearing to know is powerful

Interrogators set the tone and timing of ...well everything.
This circles back to control...along with the appearance of total control.

Constantly accessing the situation and suspect...
Interrogators usually can "read" the room / people very well.
Persistently looking for any mistake , misspeaking , lie , omission..
Then when the timing is right , the interrogators will pounce on it.

Interrogators will / can / may "hammer away" at many things...asking the same questions over and over...pouring over details
All which can trip someone up...even if what is being gone over , really hasn't got anything to do with the reason for the interrogation.

Pride / boredom / fear...all are things to be used against someone...easy tools to use as well.

People often give information away , in ways they don't realize.

Interrogations are not like what is seen in movies , books or a TV show.
It would be wise to not form an idea about them based from the above.
Andy

Edit to add.....
All of the above can be the "Why"...behind the question of "Why would someone talk during an interrogation...?"

 

[wired]

Control.
The interrogators have control over the situation...or at the very least appear to have control over it.
And the appearance of having something ...is just about as good as actually having it , in certain situations.

Proper use of information.
The interrogators go into an interrogation with knowledge of the crime and the suspect.
They may not know everything..but at times , you may not have to know everything ...
Again appearing to know is powerful

Interrogators set the tone and timing of ...well everything.
This circles back to control...along with the appearance of total control.

Constantly accessing the situation and suspect...
Interrogators usually can "read" the room / people very well.
Persistently looking for any mistake , misspeaking , lie , omission..
Then when the timing is right , the interrogators will pounce on it.

Interrogators will / can / may "hammer away" at many things...asking the same questions over and over...pouring over details
All which can trip someone up...even if what is being gone over , really hasn't got anything to do with the reason for the interrogation.

Pride / boredom / fear...all are things to be used against someone...easy tools to use as well.

Interrogations are not like what is scene in movies , books or a TV show.
It would be wise to not form an idea about them based from the above.
Andy

Oh Im sure theres a method and art to being an interrogator. Im just really confused why anyone being interrogated knowingly participates. Anything you can and will blah blah blah and all. I can't imagine ANY attorney would condone a susoect going into an interrogation without counsel present. It just seems so , for lack of a better word, stupid to even participate as the interviewee. .

 

[Andy54Hawken]

@wired
My post was in answer as to why....
Not just methods.
The method can be the reason why at times.

In any case...the only person who can say why they do the things they do....is themselves...
And at times...even this is an "I don't know".
Andy

 

[Nwcid]

Mainly because many of these people are not overly clever in the first place. Then people think they can "explain" their way out so they start talking and the more they talk the more they talk.

If you want to read or listen to a very inserting book on the subject, listen to Never Split the Difference by Chris Voss. He also has a lot of good free YouTube videos also. A a leader and educator this made an impact on how I approach things. I try and listen to the book at least once a year. My next favorite book is Mans Search for Meaning. Another interesting one is The Gift of Fear.

 

[Xaevian]

 

[TTSX]

What?

 

[salmon creek gary]

I've some insight, having retired after thirty years as a criminal investigator (federal polygraph examiner for the last twenty of those years).

Why do they talk? Among many types, there are some folks who like to talk, some folks who deperately want to get it off their chest, some folks that feel unconcerned because (they think) they're too important to take a fall, and others - particularly some genius types - just know (heh) they're so smart that they could talk their way out of hell. Easiest is the guy who is looking for understanding and absolution (interrogators will happily act non-judgemental and empathetic). With all that said, remember that those are only a few of the many talker-types out there.

Investigators become good interrogators by first becoming very, very easy to talk with. Plus, they even get training on some extremely effective structured interview approaches. I'll mention one - the Reid interview & interrogation system, which you can even research for yourselves (I've no qualms about making that suggestion; the technique has even worked against folks with training and experience using the Reid system).

Polygraph: A roomful of skeptical defense attorneys once sat through my presentation on polygraph, including a practical demonstration. All of 'em left the room convinced that it actually did work, and silently vowing to never let an accused client take a gov't or LE polygraph exam.* Some of them still allowed poly exams, but strictly prohibited a post-test interview to bar the examiner from confronting and interrogating their client. That's risky since some clients will get diarrhea of the mouth and sink their own case during pre-exam discussions. Thus, many lawyers stick to that "never, ever" rule.

Because no one wants "a machine" to supplant juries as finder of truth, polygraph results are normally (but not always) inadmissable in court; however, every word uttered during pre- and post-test discussion is fair game. Good examiners are first and foremost, good interrogators. Is it any wonder that many examiners simply rely on "the machine" as a way to get knee to knee with suspects?

OK, no matter if it's an interview or a polygraph, take heed. You might be convinced it will only take a simple and cooperative explanation to straighten things out and you'll soon go home to your family; but stop, remember two things. Those officers are getting paid to sit & talk for hours in that room; you are not. And they have skills.

Now, a war story (telling on myself): One of the shortest interviews I was ever involved in negated my experience and training:
After the Article 31warning (civilians call it a Maranda warning):
Q: Do you understand those rights?
A: YES.
Q: Do you want to speak to an attorney?
A: NO.
Q: Are you willing then to talk with us about the matter under investigation?
A: NO.
So, he walked because we'd called him in before the case was fully developed; lesson learned. Granted, if there is already probable cause for an arrest, just saying NO isn't going to get anyone out the door. It will, however, prevent inadvertently giving them even more.

* Footnote about polygraph: Some lawyers do insist that their clients undergo an exam conducted by their own privately-hired examiner. F. Lee Bailey was one of those lawyers, so now you know how it came to pass that OJ took a polygraph exam. You would never, ever, have heard a peep about that exam from the "dream team" lawyers, but OJ ran off at the mouth to the press. P.S. The exam result "numbers" that OJ spouted were so far from "inconclusive" that I'm sure his poly examiner - after reviewing the charts - had a hard time keeping a straight face.