Interview and interrogation

1. Interview and interrogation

2. Interview process

3. What is a “witness?” • Anyone with personal knowledge (saw, heard, felt, smelled) of any fact or circumstance, including things that happened, words said, the presence of documents and other tangible items, that can help prove or disprove that an offense was planned or committed, that someone participated or had a motive or opportunity, or that physical or documentary evidence exists • A person is still considered a “witness” if what they have to say furnishes investigative leads but is inadmissible in court

4. Conventional interview • Warm-up period • Identify the witness • Inform the witness about the subject of the interview • Place witness at ease, reduce anxiety • Main body of interview • Use open-ended questions (“what happened?”, “what did you see next?”) • Phrase questions positively (e.g., “how fast was the car going?”), not suggestively (“was the car doing about fifty?”) • Keep questions brief and narrowly focused • Place questions systematically, if possible in chronological order • Wrap-up • At the end go over the answers • Ask if anything was left out

5. Structured interview – Frazee three-step process • Respondent tells the story in their own way • Take notes • Minimize interruptions • If must clarify, repeat what the respondent said, phrasing it as a question • Officer uses notes to guide the respondent in retelling the story chronologically (step by step) • Take notes • Maintain a logical sequence • Focus on the important aspects (what may be evidence) • Challenge respondent when necessary • Bring up missed topics but don’t suggest what to say • Officer reads back finalized notes • Encourage challenges to your retelling • Make corrections and read them back for concurrence

6. Frazee three-step interview process -- residential burglary -- officer’s report On _____________ I interviewed Joe (or) Trudy Smith, 123 Elm St., Los Angeles. He/she said as follows: Ms. Smith lives at this home with her husband, Joe and their son, Steven. On _____ she left for work at 8:00 am, locking the house. Her husband had already left. She returned at 6:00 pm and discovered the burglary. Her son was present. He supposedly arrived about 5:30 pm, after football practice, but waited for her to call police. Ms. Smith observed muddy footprints leading from the living room window, which was open. The window was not damaged but she does not know if it had been locked. Their upstairs bedroom was ransacked. Missing property includes a new Philips DVD changer, value $500, which was kept on a shelf downstairs, and a jewelry box, normally kept on the bureau, in her upstairs bedroom. Also missing are items from the jewelry box, including a diamond cocktail ring valued at $3,000. Ms. Smith suspects that her son’s friend, Josh, may be involved. Josh is given run of the house by her son. Ms. Smith believes that Josh has been in juvenile hall for theft. According to Ms. Smith, Josh is not on the football team.

7. Cognitive interview • Purpose is to enhance recall • Technique and its purpose described to the witness • Be careful not to suggest anything • Do not stress the witness’s importance • Steps • Witness describes the physical environment where the incident took place • Witness reports his feelings and reactions • Witness mentions everything they can remember • Witness recalls events in a different order • Witness reports incident from another person’s point of view

8. Legal Issues

9. Terminology and admissibility • Interview or interrogation? • Interview a witness / interrogate a suspect • Legally there is no distinction unless a person is in custody (i.e., “custodial interrogation” -- see next slide) • Admission or confession? • Confession: as to all elements of a crime • Admission: something less • Requirements for admissibility of interviews/interrogations • If custodial, must first advise of Miranda rights • BUT - cannot always interview those in custody (see later slide) • Statements must be voluntary (Fifth Amendment) • Interview or interrogation techniques must not “shock the conscience”: Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

10. Miranda v. Arizona (1966) • Purposes • To discourage police from using coercon • To prevent involuntary confessions • Applies only to custodial interrogation • Freedom of movement must be significantly restricted • Person does not need to be under arrest (temporary detentions such as stop-and-frisk and during a search warrant are custodial) • U.S. v. Kim (9th. Circuit, 2002) • Must advise a suspect of their Fifth (incrimination) and Sixth Amendment (lawyer) rights before questioning • Interviewing suspects not “in custody” • It’s what the suspect thinks that is important • U.S. v. Hayden (9th. Circuit, 2001)

11. Right to counsel (Sixth Amendment) • Constitutional -- goes above and beyond Miranda • Must stop an interview as soon as: • Person asks for an attorney, OR • Formal charges are brought in court • A Complaint is filed, OR • An Indictment is returned, OR • An arrest warrant is issued • A search warrant does not prohibit interviewing a suspect without counsel (Miranda applies, since persons detained during a search warrant are “in custody”)

12. Voluntariness and “shock theconscience” • Bram v. U.S. (1897): Confession must be voluntary – not obtained by direct or implied promise or improper influence, such as the “force of hope or fear”. • Brown v. Mississippi (1936): Beating some to make them confess (a) shocks the conscience and (b) makes confessions involuntary. • Ashcraft v. Tennessee (1944): Whether police interrogation “shocks the conscience” depends on the “totality of the circumstances”. • Rochin v. California (1953): Police behavior that “shocks the conscience” is a violation of the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. In this case officers choked a suspect who was swallowing pills, and when unsuccessful had his stomach pumped out. • Frazier v. Cupp (1969). A continuous, “relentless” 36-hour interrogation is illegal.

13. Examples of inadmissible confessions... • Leyra v. Denno (1954): Defendant, suffering from severe sinus condition, is relentlessly interrogated. A doctor (really a psychiatrist) sent in to “help” skillfully breaks down the defendant’s will by, among other things, telling him how much better he would feel if he confessed. • Spano v. New York (1959): Defendant confesses to a close friend, a police cadet. He then confesses again to detectives after being repeatedly begged by his friend, who says that if the defendant does not talk he (the cadet) will get in trouble and his wife and kids would suffer. • Rogers v. Richmond (1961): After prolonged interrogation defendant confesses when officers threaten to arrest his sick wife. Supreme Court ruled the confession inadmissible because it was not free and voluntary, but made under the influence of a promise or threat.

14. Interviewing issues

15. Interviewing children and juveniles • Blurry line between right and wrong, between reality and fantasy • Children concentrate on the present • Want to resolve immediate problems • Don’t think ahead or consider the consequences for others • Easily influenced and manipulated • Want to please adults • Unsophisticated, little life experience • Don’t understand the CJ system • Assume that police and adults will do the right thing • Don’t understand adult needs and motivations • Don’t appreciate the seriousness of their situation • Believe that everything will turn out OK once their parents or guardians become involved

16. 'I felt everyone knew I was lying. But myparents said, "You're doing fine.Don't worry." And everyone was saying howproud they were of me.' On 10/30/05 the L.A. Times Magazine published a long, heart-felt apology from Kyle Sapp, who as an eight-year-old was one of several hundred children who said they had been forced by the owner and employees of the McMartin preschool in Manhattan Beach to participate in an untold number of lurid sex acts. According to Kyle, it was all untrue. His family was very dysfunctional and he was always looking for praise. So he simply told his parents and the interviewers at Children’s Institute International what they obviously wanted to hear. He knew that lawyers wanted a consistent account, so he put a lot of pressure on himself to provide just that. ‘I don’t think they thought I was telling the truth, just that I was telling the same stories consistently, doing what needed to be done to get these teachers judged guilty.’

17. Youth statements and recantations: who’s on first? In 2004 an 8-year old girl wasstrangled to death in the Georgiatrailer park where she lived. Atroubled 12-year old neighbor boyconfessed. He later retracted hisconfession, alleging that police hadrelentlessly interrogated him forseveral hours. In 1995 he enteredinto a plea agreement and receivedtwo years in a juvenile facility. In February 2006 a mentally disturbed 18-year old said he, not the 12-year old, was the real killer. This new confession seemed credible because the victim was heading towards his residence when she disappeared. He also gave police intimate details of the crime. But then he also recanted. The victim’s parents are convinced that the 18-year old is the real killer and have apologized to the 12-year old’s family. The police disagree; however, a grand jury indicted the 18-year old, leading to the original suspect’s release. A trial is pending.

18. 2004 Garden Grove drifter: "He grabbed my hair and then he startedpulling me. And that's when I screamed. I tried to go away, and thenmy friends were trying to help me, and that's when he startedchoking me.“ As Eric Nordmark sat on trial in Santa Ana for molestingthree girls, he was convinced that his accuser had been assaulted bysomeone. But he was wrong. In jail since May 2003, Nordmark wasfreed after the girls admitted they made it all up to avoid being punished for coming home late. The girls were prosecuted in juvenile court and will be on probation until age 21. 1984 McMartin case: Interviewing techniques implanted false memories of sexual abuse into scores of children who attended a Manhattan Beach day-care. The case soon fell apart. Of the seven employees indicted, only two were tried and both were acquitted. The Bakersfield 46: In May 2004 a Kern Countyjudge declared John Stoll innocent after the manserved eighteen years in prison for allegedlyleading a cabal of Bakersfield child molesters.The last of forty-six defendants in a string ofput-up cases, Stoll’s luck turned during twotearful, in-court recantations, including one by a26-year old man whose false statements sent hisown mother to prison for six years.

19. The Wenatchee “child sex ring” • Between 1994-5 forty-three adults were arrested on “horrific tales” of sexually abusing sixty children in Wenatchee. Eighteen were convicted. The investigation was initiated by Wenatchee police detective Bob Perez and joined by State child protective services. Prosecutions were based on interviews with the children and confessions obtained by Perez and his colleagues. • Among those charged with multiple counts of child rape and molestation were several church members: • Pastor Robert Roberson and his wife, Connie; • Honnah Sims, a Sunday-school teacher; • Harold and Idella Everett, two developmentally disabled parishioners. They were accused by their two children, both of whom were living with foster parents: Detective Bob Perez and his wife • Others arrested and prosecuted include: Idella Everett • Carol and Mark Doggett. They were arrested on 1,000 counts of rape after they asked for police and CPS help in dealing with their troubled son; • Michael Rose, a laborer, on 336 counts of child rape • And on...and on...and on

20. Child victim interviews • Many of the victims had a history of making “outrageous” claims of sexual abuse. Others had actually been abused by blood relatives. When they repeated the same accusations against new foster parents they were taken at face value. • After making inconsistent statements filled with “pornographic fiction” to investigators, many children recanted. Their recantations were ignored. • Twenty-nine children were sent for prolonged stays at Pine Crest, a seedy Idaho psychiatric hospital that offered special interrogation techniques. • The detective and CPS workers routinely threw away interview notes. • Things suspects said were purposely twisted by investigators • Statements favorable to the defendants were withheld from their lawyers • Prosecutors filed charges on literally every case brought to them • Judges rejected defense requests to allow expert testimony about false memory syndrome

21. Two kids taken to Pine Crest Sarah Doggett (r), 16, was forcibly taken to Pine Crest by CPS officials, who said she was “suicidal”: “Why did almost all my treatment at Pine Crest deal with me having to remember sexual abuse that never happened? Jessica Cunningham, 17, had previously spent time at Pine Crest. She was sent there by her parents for behavioral problems. Jessica said that the detective and CPS pressed her to say that “my parents did things to me and to my sisters...and if I didn't, I wouldn't get out of Pine Crest...They had their own ideas of what happened in my family. When I disagreed and said they were wrong, they said I was lying. I was hiding the hiding the truth.... I had to remember. I had to talk. Disclosure would make me feel better. It just never ended...I was a prisoner....” Jessica’s mother, Connie, was convicted and got 46 years. She and her daughter later reunited and now live in California.

22. Defendant interviews • “The more I said I didn’t do any of the things [the detective] said I did the angrier he got....He told me I was going to jail for the rest of my life or I could go home, I could have my son back, if I gave him a statement. I said whatever he wanted me to say, just to have it over....” (Got 16 ½ years) • “I asked, ‘can I have an attorney’? He says ‘no, there’s no need for one to be present because we’re just questioning you.’....I wasn’t sure what I was signing because I was flabbergasted.” (Alcoholic, IQ of 73) • “My state of mind when I signed the confession was that I wanted to get out of there and get away from him....[The detective told her she was not a suspect]....I wanted to go home to my own bed, my own house, my own kids. He made promises that I could go if I just signed. What a liar.” (Woman. As an infant, she lost a leg to a hog. Plea bargained, got 40 years.) • “I kept saying ‘no, no, no, no. I want an attorney.’ But he said ‘you don’t need one because you are only a witness’.” (Mother of four, barely literate, had the detective read her the confession. Turned down a plea bargain, was convicted by jury, got 23 years.)

23. Outcomes • The detective no longer works there • Of the eighteen convicted, all have been released • Most convictions were overturned. Some pleas were accepted and entered on lesser, “usually unrelated” charges • Many lawsuits were filed by the defendants: • In December 1999 the State settled with the Robersons and Honnah Sims for $850,000 • In November 2000 Chelan County settled with Roberson, who previously won over $200,000 in damages from a Federal jury • On Sept. 30, 2001, a Spokane County jury found Wenatchee and Douglas County negligent in the investigation of six plaintiffs, including Sims and Roberson. They awarded $3 million to Honnah Sims and her husband.

24. The Murder of Stephanie Crowe On the morning of January 21, 1998,Stephanie Crowe, 12, was found stabbed to deathin her Escondido home. None of the otherresidents – her parents, grandmother, sister andbrother – said they heard anything during thenight. Police immediately focused on three youths – her brother Michael, 14, and two friends, Aaron Houser and Joshua Treadway. Four days later they picked up Michael Crowe. He at first denied having anything to do with his sister’s death. But during a relentless six-hour session the next day, in which detectives concocted stories about finding his sister’s blood in his room, Crowe finally confessed although in a most peculiar way – by saying that, yes, he did it and that, yes, he was making it up. Escondido police then picked up Joshua Treadway. After being threatened with prison and subjected to two grueling interrogations, including a ten-hour session in which police administered a voice stress analysis, Treadway said he acted as a lookout while Crowe and Houser did the deed. Aaron Houser maintained his innocence throughout.

25. Certain that the crime was solved, prosecutors pointed to thethree teens’ love of fantasy role-playing games and Michael’sadmitted jealousy of his popular sister. The boys were quicklyindicted. But a judge later threw out all of Crowe’s confessionand most of Treadway’s, ruling that both teens had beencoerced. So the defense dredged up questionable forensictestimony. “Expert” witnesses offered to testify that a knifefound under Treadway’s bed was “identical” to the weaponthat inflicted the fatal wounds, that the killing could not havebeen committed by only one person, and that the words “kill, kill” left on the victim’s windowsill could have been written by Michael Crowe. An FBI crime scene profile strongly suggested that the crime was an inside job. Still, there were many inconsistencies. To have participated in the killing Treadway had to have snuck out of his home in the middle of the night and made the ten-mile roundtrip journey on foot. It simply didn’t add up. And there was something else...

26. Hours before the murder the Crowe’s neighborsspotted Richard Tuite, a 28-year old schizophrenicwith a record for drug and property crimes. Tuitehad past arrests for burglary, a stabbing and forleering at young girls and following them home.Tuite, who was roaming the area, stood on thevictim’s property and looked up at the windows.But by the time that an officer arrived Tuite wasnowhere to be seen. As the officer left he radioed in that he saw the Crowe’s laundry-room door closing. The next day officers brought Tuite to the police station, where they took his clothing and fingernail scrapings. Tuite was cooperative and was let go. Defense attorneys examined Tuite’s clothing. Spotting suspicious stains, they asked they be tested. Detectives, who pooh-poohed Tuite’s ability to commit the crime, said they did so and found nothing. But the defense persevered and Tuite’s things were sent for DNA analysis. Richard Tuite

27. Six months after their arrest a judge held overthe three boys for trial as adults. But the judgewarned prosecutors that their evidence waswholly lacking. He also wondered why Tuitehad been dismissed as a suspect. The boyswere released to the custody of their parents. In January 1999, as jury selection for the boy’strial got underway, the crime lab reported that Tuite’s shirt was spattered with Stephanie Crowe’s blood. The boys were freed. Escondido police were replaced by the Sheriff’s office and the State Attorney General’s office took over the prosecution. In May 2003 Tuite was convicted of voluntary manslaughter for Stephanie Crowe’s murder. In August 2004 he was sentenced to thirteen years.

28. In June 2003 True Crime Publications published“Who Killed Stephanie Crowe: the Anatomy of aMurder Investigation.” The book’s author,Paul E. Tracy, Ph.D., founder and professor at theCrime and Justice Studies Program at University ofTexas at Dallas, claims that the three boys are morelikely than Tuite to have killed Stephanie Crowe.The book’s cover gives source credit to the twoEscondido detectives, now retired, who investigated the case and apparently still believe that the boys did it. One of them,Chris McDonough, is named as the book’s co-author by the“Institute of Investigative Science”, a consulting and training firm where he works. In 2004 Tracy was selected as his university’s “teacher of the year”.

29. Codefendants and jailhouse informers • Codefendants often try to get deals for themselves by testifying against each other. • This is often encouraged by police and prosecutors • Since they participated in the same crime, their information can often be corroborated, reducing (but not eliminating) the risk of a wrongful conviction • “Jailhouse informers” are different. These are inmates who claim that another inmate confessed to committing a crime in which the informer was not involved. • Often used in murder cases where evidence is scant • Jailhouse informers testify in exchange for a variety of favors, including reduction in their own sentences, dismissal of charges, furloughs and better housing • False testimony from jailhouse informers is the leading cause of false convictions in capital cases. According to a Northwestern University study, jailhouse informers were involved in half of 111 death-row exonerations since the 70’s • In 2007 Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed a California bill that would require corroboration for statements of jailhouse informers. This bill was based on a recommendation from the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice, a State panel.

30. When a codefendant lies • In 1983 Hardy and Mark Anthony Reilly were convicted of killing Reilly’s wife and her son in Van Nuys to collect on life insurance. A third conspirator, Calvin Boyd, testified under a grant of immunity that Hardy was the one who plunged knives into the victims while they slept. Hardy got the death penalty. • After the trial other witnesses came forward and swore that Hardy had backed out and that the real killer was Boyd, who avoided being prosecuted for fingering Hardy. There is considerable evidence against Boyd, who witnesses saw with cuts on his hands after the crime. Boyd originally convinced detectives that he was home when the murders took place. • In July 2007 the California Supreme Court ruled that while it was clear that Hardy was at one time in the conspiracy, it was equally clear that he wasn’t the actual killer, and it ordered that he be resentenced.

31. The most notorious jailhouse informer in US history was in L.A. • In 1989 Leslie White, a jailhouse informer who testified in hundreds of cases on behalf of L.A. County prosecutors admitted that he repeatedly lied. From jail he demonstrated on video how easy it was to pretend to be a police officer and use the phone to get “insider” information from prosecutors on pending cases to make the alleged confessions of other inmates seem plausible. • An investigation into White’s claims revealed that prosecutors had been warned by their peers that White was unreliable but kept using his testimony in court anyways. • White’s admissions led prosecutors to reopen hundreds of cases where jailhouse informers played a role, including many where the death penalty was imposed. • White had been in and out of jails for ten years on a variety of charges. He regularly received unsupervised furloughs and other favors for testifying against other inmates. On his last furlough he beat his wife, pulled a knife on a woman and snatched her purse.

32. Jailhouse informants – the sadcase of Thomas Goldstein (and maybe theeven sadder case of Tommy Thompson) • In 1980 Tom Goldstein was arrested by Long Beachpolice for shooting to death a man who lived nearby. • An eyewitness identified Goldstein as the killer. • Edward Fink, a notorious jailhouse informant with 3 felonyconvictions testified that Goldstein confessed the crime.Prosecutors never disclosed that they gave Fink a “deal”on new charges in exchange for his testimony. • Similar testimony by Fink led to the 1998 execution ofTommy Thompson for an Orange County murder. • After Goldstein’s conviction the eyewitness recanted hisidentification, saying that police pressured him to pick Goldstein. • Five Federal judges eventually ruled that the conviction was wrongful. Goldstein wound up serving 24 years before he was released in 2004. • In March 2007 the US 9th. Circuit Court of Appeals allowed Goldstein’s lawsuit against Long Beach PD detectives and the L.A. District Attorney to go forward. (Goldstein v. Van De Kamp, no. 06-55537, 3/28/07). Goldstein alleged that the defendants showed bad faith by withholding evidence, knowingly using an unreliable witness, and by failing to regulate the use of jailhouse informants.

33. Harsh interrogation techniques:Threats and deception • Threats • Severe punishment • Revocation of probation or parole • Consequences to family and friends • Inducements • Monetary rewards • Leniency on their own cases • Tricks • Defining a situation as non-custodial • Misrepresenting the seriousness of a crime • Psychological tricks (feigning sympathy, blaming the victim) • Fabricating evidence

34. Harsh interrogation techniques can lead to false confessions • Even intelligent persons have falsely confessed to seek leniency • Many persons don’t understand the CJ process. They don’t appreciate that confessions are hard to “take back” • Persons who falsely confess often falsely implicate others • Particularly vulnerable • Children and juveniles • Less sophisticated • Persons with mental handicaps • Innocent persons with prior records or on probation or parole, who may fear the consequences of being convicted at trial

35. The case of James Ochoa James Ochoa was arrested for carjacking in 2005 after police followed a bloodhound to his home. Ochoa was ID’d by two victims and he was arrested. DNA found on clothing left in the stolen car was not his. When the judge threatened him with life Ochoa, who had a drug record, pled guilty to a two year term. After serving 10 months the real perpetrator was jailed for another carjacking and his DNA, which was routinely entered, came up as a match. He confessed. Orange County case mentioned in the Innocence Project

36. Dennis Rader – the “BTK” case On 2/25/05 Wichita Police arrested Dennis Rader,59, a Park City code enforcement officer, for a stringof ten brutal killings between 1973 and 1991. He hadtaunted authorities by leaving clues and sending notes signed “BTK” (bind, torture, kill). The first two victims were Julie Otero and Kathryn Bright. At the time the killer had not announced himself and police had no reason to suspect a serial murderer. Soon a troubled young person stepped forward, said he committed the murders and implicated two friends. They were arrested and held for trial. In October 1974 the killer wrote a note to authorities claiming responsibility and describing in exacting detail how the killings were committed: "Those three dude you have in custody are just talking to get publicity. They know nothing at all. I did it by myself and no ones help.” Source: Los Angeles Times, 3/6/05

37. Ozem Goldwire –Autistic Man Falsely Confesses On June 4, 2007 Ozem Goldwire, an autistic man whoconfessed to killing his sister a year earlier was releasedwhen the D.A. concluded that the confession was false. On January 2, 2006 Goldwire came home to find his sisterSherika beaten to death, but police didn’t believe him, andafter hours of questioning and four statements, including avideo in which he denied being responsible, he confessedthat he strangled his sister over an argument about the TV volume. Goldwire told a psychologist that he confessed to please police. “I had no way to get out [of the interrogation] but to lie, I was under so much pressure and was in sheer fright because of their behavior." He easily passed a polygraph.

38. Eddie Joe Lloyd In 1984, while housed in a psychiatric ward, Lloyd confessed to Detroit police that he raped and killed a 16-year old girl. The judge who sentenced Lloyd openly said that he was sorry Michigan did not have a death penalty. Lloyd, now 54, was convicted by a jury and spent 17 years in prison. In 1995 Lloyd saw a TV program about the “Innocence Project”, which has used DNA to free more than 100 falsely convicted persons. Eddie Lloyd became the 110th. Why did he confess to a crime he did not commit? Because he was crazy. He told officers he raped and killed the girl in a misguided attempt to help the police solve a horrible crime. Detroit News investigation

39. L.A.P.D. Detectives get Mentally HandicappedMan to Incriminate Himself; He Does 12 Years In 1992 four prostitutes were found murdered in South L.A.Detectives searching for the killer interviewed David Jones,a mentally handicapped man with an IQ of 62. Jones was injail for the attempted rape of a prostitute. Through persistent,manipulative interviewing they got Jones to say that he knew theother prostitutes, smoked crack with them, and placed them in chokeholds when they refused to have sex. He denied killing anyone. DNA was recovered from the prostitutes. All the DNA excluded Jones. But he was convicted at trial and got 36 years. The killings continued. In 2001 an LAPD detective working cold cases used DNA to try to solve a string of killings that seemed to be the work of a serial rapist. Geographically profiling an area of South L.A., he used DNA to match ten rape/murders to Chester D. Turner, who was already in prison for rape. These crimes included the rape/murders for which Jones was convicted. In 2004 Jones was exonerated, released and received a settlement of $720,000. Turner was convicted of the eleven rape/murders in May 2007. The real killer –Chester D. Turner

40. “Recovered” memories are often false memories • Concept that psychological trauma may cause people to repress memories, which can be later recovered using specialized interviewing techniques • Wrongful convictions based on recovered memories have led many psychologists to argue that the process that supposedly “recovers” memories actually implants false memories • Many now consider the entire topic of recovered memory a junk science

41. Memory is not fixed -- it’s malleable • What can implant false memories? • Guided information (coaching or leading a subject) • Having subjects interpret dreams • Using hypnosis to aid recall • Providing false information • False memories can be implanted unwittingly • Not on purpose but through a flawed interviewing process • False memories can be just as emotional as true memories • Everyone is susceptible to some degree • Children and juveniles particularly susceptible -- they are fearful of not pleasing adults, cannot appreciate consequences of their actions and cannot distinguish between fact and fantasy

42. UCI Professor Wins Major Award Elizabeth Loftus, Professor of Psychology at UCI,was awarded the $200,000 Grawemyer prize inPsychology for her research debunking repressedmemory syndrome. “The psychologist has shown that people not onlyforget but also falsely remember, meaning that theysincerely and vividly can recall events that never happened when information suggested to them becomes entwined with their memory of what actually happened. She points out that the individual may not be able to separate the real threads of memory from the added strands of suggestion.” Dr. Loftus, a member of the National Academy of Sciences and the American Academy for the Advancement of Science, has consulted on many high-profile criminal cases, including the Oklahoma City Bombing, where the FBI mistakenly arrested an innocent security guard. The creation of false memories video

43. Interview and interrogation aids

44. Polygraph • Belief that deception  anxiety  physiological symptoms • Brain imaging supposedly shows more activity when persons lie • Some early experiments suggested that the polygraph consistently uncovered liars • Not admissible in criminal courts • Measures • Blood pressure • Heart rate • Respiratory rate • Electrical conductivity of the skin(galvanic skin resistance, or GSR)

45. Polygraph -technique and applications • Technique • Control questions establish individual baselines • Respondents answer truthfully to some questions • Respondents are directed to lie to others • Baselines compared with responses to questions of interest • Responses that exceed the responses from directed lies suggest deception • Applications • Employee screening • Investigation (see next slide) • Eliminate suspects • Obtain truthful statements (may feel compelled to tell the truth) • Obtain confessions (guilty might so fear the machine they confess to the examiner) • Provide investigative leads

46. Polygraph -Limitations • Considered too unreliable to be used as evidence in court • Many variables affect the results • Questionable scientific basis • Operator skill • Respondent variables • Intelligence • Temperament • Deceptive skills (e.g., Aldrich Ames, a long-term CIA agent who spied for the Soviets passed several polygraphs) • National Academy of Sciences review • Polygraph useless as an employment screening device • Many false positives and negatives • Of limited value in criminal investigations NAS Conclusions and recommendations

47. Voice stress analysis • Same underlying principle as polygraph • Deception  anxiety  physiological symptoms • Fluctuations in voice • Pitch rises under stress • Inaudible changes • Much simpler to administer • Considered “junk science” -- accuracy is even lower than polygraph (one could do as well guessing) • Used in Crowe case (see next slide)

48. Maker of voice-analysis machinesettles Crowe lawsuit Following a Federal judge’s order that the casego to trial, the “National Institute for TruthVerification”, maker of the voice stress analyzerused by police in the interrogation of the boys, settled a lawsuit filed by their families. While the company admitted no responsibility, Michael Crowe’s mother, Cheryl, said that the settlement indicates “they know they’re wrong.” Her attorney, Milton Silverman, called the machine a “fraud” with no scientific basis. In fact, the company stated in its court filing that "the CVSA is not capable of lie detection and specifically cautions its users regarding the proper use of the device." A civil action against the remaining defendants – Escondido police and County prosecutors – is pending. From the North County Times, May 25, 2005

49. Body language • Deception and fear of punishment supposedly produce visual cues • Physiological responses (sweating, increase in pulse, breathing rate) recorded by a polygraph can become obvious to the observer • Physical reaction supposedly becomes more pronounced as questions focus on wrongdoing • Remember: this is not science!

50. Good and bad interrogation practices • Good practices • Record entire interview if at all possible • Maintain a professional image at all times • Carefully listen to a suspect’s entire story • Challenge inconsistencies or what cannot be corroborated • Supply beverages • Use special care with juveniles and the mentally unbalanced • Promise nothing except to tell the prosecutor what was said • Bad practices • Touching, being physically threatening or aggressive • Yelling, screaming • Lying about evidence or what others said • Prolonged sessions (more than two or three hours) • Depriving a suspect of sleep, drink or food • Threatening friends or family members with arrest • Promising leniency (only a prosecutor can make such deals)