Professional Documents
Culture Documents
General Principles of Crime Investigation
General Principles of Crime Investigation
Basic Considerations.
Maximum Benefits – Informant should
be used for the maximum benefit of
the entire organization, and not of only
one officer or investigator;
A designated executive should be
aware of the identity of the
informant. At least two (2) individuals
in the law enforcement agency should
know the identity of a confidential
informant; and
Consider a program within your
respective commands for the
development of the informants.
Probably the most demanding and
least mechanical phase of
investigative work is the INTERVIEW
and INTERROGATION.
Itis also one of the most critical,
for the effectiveness of an
investigator is largely proportional
to his skills in eliciting information
from the witnesses, informants,
complainants and suspects.
If the investigator cannot get all
the material facts from these
persons at the outset of the
investigation, it can mean the
difference between solution and
frustration.
Interview and Verbal Interrogation
are one and the same creature in
interrogation. Both are by oral
medium and, therefore, unwritten.
Both are preliminary inquiries that
may ripen to written interrogation.
Both have a common thrust and
purpose, “to determine whether the
witness is credible or incompetent,
or whether one is purveyor of truth
or peddler of lies.”
Interview- is a simple inquiry/
conversation-type elicitation of
information from a willing victim(s)/
witness(es) relevant to a certain
crime/incident/event under
investigation.
“Never conduct or let anyone conduct an
interview if the interviewer has not gone to
the crime scene. The questioning should be
in agreement with the facts and conditions
at the crime scene. The questioning will lead
wayward for the interviewer who had not
seen personally the crime scene and he will
not be in a position to distinguish half-
truths, exaggerations or falsehood from
the answers of the person being
interviewed”.
The interview of a witness can
be described by the acronym
“IRONIC” – which stands for
“IDENTITY, RAPPORT, OPENING
STATEMENT, NARRATION,
INQUIRY and CONCLUSION”.
Priorto commencing interview, the
investigator should IDENTIFY
himself to the witness by name,
rank and agency. The investigator’s
official authority to make the
authority is thereby established
and witness cooperation is probably
increased –
sincemost of the persons respond
positively to figures of authority.
The witness also obtains names of a
person to contact in the future, if
necessary.
Upon making contact with the
witness, the investigator must seek
to establish RAPPORT with him –
since a good interpersonal
relationship maximizes the ability
to extract information.
The salesmanship of the
investigator is crucial to a good
witness-investigator relationship.
Reluctance and even hostility can be
over come if the officer
establishes a good relationship with
the witness.
At some interview, the
investigator will need to indicate
why witness is being contacted.
But in some situations, the reasons
for inquiry will be obvious – as
where the victim teller in a bank
robbery is interviewed.
However, the witness should be told
no more about the reason for
contact than fairness requires.
As a rule, the investigator should
allow the witness to present
whatever information he possesses
as a NARRATIVE in his own words.
The officer should refrain from
injecting questions or comments until
the witness has finished his history.
Interruptions should be made only to
keep the witness on tract and
eliminate non-pertinent information.
Once the witness has told his initial
story, the investigator may then
ask specific questions to fill in
omitted acts, clarify ambiguous
statements, verify names, dates
and other details and insure that all
pertinent information has been
extracted.
Just as entries in a notepad should
contain the WHO, WHAT, WHEN,
WHERE, WHY, AND HOW of
various topics, the interviewing
officer should be sure that the
same “5 Ws and 1 H” are covered
with respect to the information
which the witness may have.
In accomplishing this task, the
investigating officer should avoid
Leading and Misleading or
Suggestive Questions. Specific
inquiries generally should required
elaboration on a point rather that a
mere “YES” or “NO” response.
The interview should be
CONCLUDED when it becomes
apparent that the witness has
nothing pertinent left to offer. At
that time, the officer should orally
summarize the witness’s statement.
At this stage, the investigator
should also insure that he has the
correct name and address of the
witness in the event that further
contact is needed. Finally, the
witness should be thanked for his
aid.
Interrogation is the skillful
questioning of a hostile person
suspecting of having committed an
offense or of a person who is
reluctant to make a full disclosure
of information in his possession
which is pertinent to the
investigation.
Toobtain information concerning the
innocence or guilt of the suspect;