Reid technique

Last updated

The Reid technique is a method of interrogation after investigation and behavior analysis. The system was developed in the United States by John E. Reid in the 1950s. Reid was a polygraph expert and former Chicago police officer. The technique is known for creating a high pressure environment for the interviewee, followed by sympathy and offers of understanding and help, but only if a confession is forthcoming. Since its spread in the 1970s, it has been widely utilized by police departments in the United States. [1]

Contents

Proponents of the Reid technique say it is useful in extracting information from otherwise unwilling suspects. Critics say the technique results in an unacceptably high rate of false confessions, especially from juveniles and people with mental impairments. Criticism has also been leveled in the opposite case—that against strong-willed interviewees, the technique causes them to stop talking and give no information whatsoever, rather than elicit lies that can be checked against for the guilty or exonerating details for the innocent. [2]

Background

In 1931, the Wickersham Commission report, "Lawlessness in Law Enforcement", showed that violent forms of interrogation (known as the "third degree" after investigation and interview) were widespread but actually reduced crime-solving by causing false confessions. [3] Involuntary alleged confessions had already been inadmissible in federal criminal trials since 1897 Bram v. United States. [4] From 1936, interrogations causing obvious physical harm were ruled inadmissible by the US Supreme Court in Brown v. Mississippi. [5]

A number of manuals were developed based on deception rather than assault, such as by W. R. Kidd in 1940, Clarence D. Lee in 1953 and Arther and Caputo in 1959. The most infuential was from the writings of Fred E. Inbau from 1942, entitled "Lie Detection and Criminal Interrogation". For the third edition in 1953, Inbau invited John Reid as co-author, for a new section on so-called lie detector techniques, such as the "control question". [6]

Fred E. Inbau, a Northwestern University lawyer and criminologist, and John E. Reid, a law graduate who had worked in the Chicago Police Department, would publish other manuals together. Inbau had worked at the Scientific Crime Detection Laboratory (SCDL), which was set up in 1929 to better combat crime after the St Valentine’s Day Massacre. Inbau become the director when it was sold by Northwestern to the Chicago police in 1938, and he trained police officers and prosecutors. [7] Both Leonard Keeler, inventor of polygraph technology, and John Reid set up polygraph training clinics in Chicago after working at the SCDL.

In 1955 in Lincoln, Nebraska, John E. Reid had helped gain a confession from a suspect, Darrel Parker, for Parker's wife's murder. This case established Reid's reputation and popularized his technique. [8] Parker recanted his confession the next day, but it was admitted to evidence at his trial. He was convicted by a jury and sentenced to life in prison. He was later determined to be innocent, after another man confessed and was found to have been the perpetrator. Parker sued the state for wrongful conviction; it paid him $500,000 in compensation. [9]

In spite of Parker's false confession, Reid co-authored a text explaining his interrogation techniques. [10] The first edition of the 'Reid Manual' (Criminal Interrogation and Confessions) in 1962, was heavily criticized by the US Supreme Court. [11] Its famous Miranda v. Arizona warnings were made in large part in response to the psychological subjugation and risks of the Reid techniques. Inbau and Reid gained public notability themselves, due also to appearing in a 1964 inquiry into the federal government's use of "lie detectors". [4]

A second edition of the manual, in 1967, incorporated advice on how to use Miranda warnings. A third edition, in 1986, marked the start of what has been called 'the new Reid method'. [12]

Reid died in 1982, and Joseph Buckley became president of Reid Inc. [9] By 2013, according to The New Yorker , the company trained "more interrogators than any other company in the world", [9] and Reid's technique had been adopted by law enforcement agencies of many different types[ vague ], with it being especially influential in North America. [13]

Process

The Reid technique consists of a three-phase process beginning with fact analysis, followed by the behavior analysis interview (a non-accusatory interview designed to develop investigative and behavioral information), [9] followed, when appropriate, by the Reid nine steps of interrogation. According to process guidelines, individuals should be interrogated only when the information developed from the interview and investigation indicate that the subject is involved in the commission of the crime.

In the Reid technique, interrogation is an accusatory process, in which the investigator tells the suspect that the results of the investigation clearly indicate that they did commit the crime in question. [9] The interrogation is in the form of a monologue presented by the investigator rather than a question and answer format. The demeanor of the investigator during the course of an interrogation is ideally understanding, patient, and non-demeaning. The Reid technique user's goal is to make the suspect gradually more comfortable with telling the truth. This is accomplished by the investigator's first imagining and then offering the suspect various psychological constructs as justification for their behavior.

For example, an admission of guilt might be prompted by the question, "Did you plan this out or did it just happen on the spur of the moment?" This is called an alternative question, which is based on an implicit assumption of guilt. Critics regard this strategy as hazardous, arguing that it is subject to confirmation bias (likely to reinforce inaccurate beliefs or assumptions) and may lead to prematurely narrowing an investigation.

Nine steps of interrogation

The Reid technique's nine steps of interrogation are: [14]

  1. Positive confrontation. Advise the suspect that the evidence has led the police to the individual as a suspect. Offer the person an early opportunity to explain why the offense took place.
  2. Try to shift the blame away from the suspect to some other person or set of circumstances that prompted the suspect to commit the crime. That is, develop themes containing reasons that will psychologically justify or excuse the crime. Themes may be developed or changed to find one to which the accused is most responsive.
  3. Try to minimize the frequency of suspect denials.
  4. At this point, the accused will often give a reason why he or she or they did not or could not commit the crime. Try to use this to move towards the acknowledgement of what they did.
  5. Reinforce sincerity to ensure that the suspect is receptive.
  6. The suspect will become quieter and listen. Move the theme of the discussion toward offering alternatives. If the suspect cries at this point, infer guilt.
  7. Pose the "alternative question", giving two choices for what happened; one more socially acceptable than the other. The suspect is expected to choose the easier option but whichever alternative the suspect chooses, guilt is admitted. There is always a third option which is to maintain that they did not commit the crime.
  8. Lead the suspect to repeat the admission of guilt in front of witnesses and develop corroborating information to establish the validity of the confession.
  9. Document the suspect's admission or confession and have him or her prepare a recorded statement (audio, video or written).

Validity

Critics claim the technique too easily produces false confessions, [15] especially with juveniles, [16] [17] with second-language speakers in their non-native language, [18] and with people whose communication/language abilities are affected by mental disabilities, including reduced intellectual capacity. [19] While this criticism acknowledges that the technique can be "effective" in producing confessions, it is not accurate at getting guilty parties to confess, instead sweeping up people pushed to their mental limits by stress. Critics also dislike how police often apply the technique on subjects of unclear guilt, when simply gathering more information in non-stressful interrogations can be more useful both for convicting guilty suspects and exonerating innocent suspects. [2]

Of 311 people exonerated through post-conviction DNA testing, more than a quarter had given false confessions—including those convicted in such notorious cases as the Central Park Five. [9]

Some of the more minor details Reid propounded have since been called into question as well. For example, Reid believed that "tells" such as fidgeting was a sign of lying, and more generally believed that trained police interrogators could intuitively check lies merely by how they were delivered. Later studies have shown no useful correlation between any sort of body movements such as breaking eye contact or fidgeting and truth-telling. While police can be effective at cracking lies, it is via gathering contradicting evidence; police officers have been shown in studies to be no better than average people at detecting lies merely from their delivery. [2]

Several European countries prohibit some interrogation techniques that are currently allowed in the United States, such as a law enforcement officer lying to a suspect about evidence, due to the perceived risk of false confessions and wrongful convictions that might result, particularly with juveniles. [20] For example, §136a of the German Strafprozessordnung  [ de ] (StPO, "code of criminal procedure") bans the use of deception and intimidation in interrogations; the Reid method also conflicts with the German police's obligation to adequately inform the suspect of their right to silence. [21]

In Canada, provincial court judge Mike Dinkel ruled in 2012 that "stripped to its bare essentials, the Reid technique is a guilt-presumptive, confrontational, psychologically manipulative procedure whose purpose is to extract a confession". [22]

In December 2013, an unredacted copy of a secret FBI interrogation manual was discovered in the Library of Congress, available for public view. The manual confirmed American Civil Liberties Union concerns that FBI agents used the Reid technique in interrogations. [23]

Abuses of interrogation methods include officers treating accused suspects aggressively and telling them lies about the amount of evidence proving their guilt. Such exaggerated claims of evidence, such as video or genetics, have the potential, when combined with such coercive tactics as threats of harm or promises of leniency, to cause innocent suspects to become psychologically overwhelmed. [24] [25]

In 2015, eight organizations, including John E. Reid & Associates, settled with Juan Rivera, who was wrongfully convicted of the 1992 rape and murder of 11-year-old Holly Staker. A number of pieces of evidence excluded Rivera, including DNA from the PERK (Physical Evidence Recovery Kit) and the report from the electronic ankle monitor he was wearing at the time, as he awaited trial for a non-violent burglary, but he falsely confessed to the Staker crimes after being interrogated by the police several days after taking two polygraph examinations at Reid & Associates. After his exoneration, Rivera filed a suit for false arrest and malicious prosecution. The case was settled out of court with John E. Reid & Associates paying $2 million. [26]

Alternative models

The PEACE (Preparation and Planning, Engage and Explain, Account, Closure and Evaluate) [27] model developed in Britain "encourages more of a dialogue between investigator and suspect". [25]

In 2015, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police adopted a new standard influenced by the PEACE model. Sergeant Darren Carr, who trains police with the new approach, described it as "less Kojak and more Dr. Phil". This approach eschews the use of deceptive information to overwhelm suspects. It emphasizes information gathering over eliciting confessions and discourages investigators from presuming a suspect's guilt. [25]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Polygraph</span> Device that attempts to infer lying

A polygraph, often incorrectly referred to as a lie detector test, is a pseudoscientific device or procedure that measures and records several physiological indicators such as blood pressure, pulse, respiration, and skin conductivity while a person is asked and answers a series of questions. The belief underpinning the use of the polygraph is that deceptive answers will produce physiological responses that can be differentiated from those associated with non-deceptive answers; however, there are no specific physiological reactions associated with lying, making it difficult to identify factors that separate those who are lying from those who are telling the truth.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Central Park jogger case</span> 1989 crime in New York City

The Central Park jogger case was a criminal case concerning the assault and rape of Trisha Meili, a woman who was running in Central Park in Manhattan, New York, on April 19, 1989. Crime in New York City was peaking in the late 1980s and early 1990s as the crack epidemic surged. On the night Meili was attacked, dozens of teenagers had entered the park, and there were reports of muggings and physical assaults.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Interrogation</span> Interviews by police, military or intelligence personnel

Interrogation is interviewing as commonly employed by law enforcement officers, military personnel, intelligence agencies, organized crime syndicates, and terrorist organizations with the goal of eliciting useful information, particularly information related to suspected crime. Interrogation may involve a diverse array of techniques, ranging from developing a congenial rapport with the subject to torture.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Miscarriage of justice</span> Conviction of a person for a crime that they did not commit

A miscarriage of justice occurs when an unfair outcome occurs in a criminal or civil proceeding, such as the conviction and punishment of a person for a crime they did not commit. Miscarriages are also known as wrongful convictions. Innocent people have sometimes ended up in prison for years before their conviction has eventually been overturned. They may be exonerated if new evidence comes to light or it is determined that the police or prosecutor committed some kind of misconduct at the original trial. In some jurisdictions this leads to the payment of compensation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal justice system of Japan</span>

Within the criminal justice system of Japan, there exist three basic features that characterize its operations. First, the institutions—police, government prosecutors' offices, courts, and correctional organs—maintain close and cooperative relations with each other, consulting frequently on how best to accomplish the shared goals of limiting and controlling crime. Second, citizens are encouraged to assist in maintaining public order, and they participate extensively in crime prevention campaigns, apprehension of suspects, and offender rehabilitation programs. Finally, officials who administer criminal justice are allowed considerable discretion in dealing with offenders.

A false confession is an admission of guilt for a crime which the individual did not commit. Although such confessions seem counterintuitive, they can be made voluntarily, perhaps to protect a third party, or induced through coercive interrogation techniques. When some degree of coercion is involved, studies have found that subjects with highly sophisticated intelligence or manipulated by their so-called "friends" are more likely to make such confessions. Young people are particularly vulnerable to confessing, especially when stressed, tired, or traumatized, and have a significantly higher rate of false confessions than adults. Hundreds of innocent people have been convicted, imprisoned, and sometimes sentenced to death after confessing to crimes they did not commit—but years later, have been exonerated. It was not until several shocking false confession cases were publicized in the late 1980s, combined with the introduction of DNA evidence, that the extent of wrongful convictions began to emerge—and how often false confessions played a role in these.

In the law of criminal evidence, a confession is a statement by a suspect in crime which is adverse to that person. Some secondary authorities, such as Black's Law Dictionary, define a confession in more narrow terms, e.g. as "a statement admitting or acknowledging all facts necessary for conviction of a crime," which would be distinct from a mere admission of certain facts that, if true, would still not, by themselves, satisfy all the elements of the offense. The equivalent in civil cases is a statement against interest.

Lie detection is an assessment of a verbal statement with the goal to reveal a possible intentional deceit. Lie detection may refer to a cognitive process of detecting deception by evaluating message content as well as non-verbal cues. It also may refer to questioning techniques used along with technology that record physiological functions to ascertain truth and falsehood in response. The latter is commonly used by law enforcement in the United States, but rarely in other countries because it is based on pseudoscience.

Richard Jason Ofshe is an American sociologist and professor emeritus of sociology at the University of California, Berkeley. He is known for his expert testimony relating to coercion in small groups, confessions, and interrogations.

Statement analysis is a technique used to determine whether a suspect is telling the truth or being deceptive based on linguistic indicators. The basic principles of statement analysis are straightforward: a suspect always reveals much more than they realize. Language moves so quickly that no one has complete control over what they say and try to conceal.

Saul Kassin is an American academic, who serves as a professor of psychology at the City University of New York's John Jay College of Criminal Justice and Massachusetts Professor Emeritus of Psychology at Williams College in Williamstown, Massachusetts.

Frazier v. Cupp, 394 U.S. 731 (1969), was a United States Supreme Court case that affirmed the legality of deceptive interrogation tactics by the police.

Zvonimir Roso was a Croatian criminologist and psychologist, one of South-eastern Europe's foremost authorities in the science of polygraph and the founder of what is now known as "Zagreb School of Polygraph".

Voice stress analysis (VSA) and computer voice stress analysis (CVSA) are collectively a pseudoscientific technology that aims to infer deception from stress measured in the voice. The CVSA records the human voice using a microphone, and the technology is based on the tenet that the non-verbal, low-frequency content of the voice conveys information about the physiological and psychological state of the speaker. Typically utilized in investigative settings, the technology aims to differentiate between stressed and non-stressed outputs in response to stimuli, with high stress seen as an indication of deception.

Imagination inflation is a type of memory distortion that occurs when imagining an event that never happened increases confidence in the memory of the event.

Adrian P. Thomas was a father of seven children living in Troy, New York, when, in September 2008, his four-month-old son died. A preliminary medical examination indicated that the infant died from head trauma. The police interrogated Thomas for nearly 10 hours during which he confessed to throwing his son on the bed three times. The entire interrogation was videotaped. He was charged with second-degree murder, found guilty, and sentenced to 25 years to life in prison.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Juan Rivera (wrongful conviction)</span> American man wrongfully convicted three times

Juan A. Rivera Jr. is an American man who was wrongfully convicted three times for the 1992 rape and murder of 11-year-old Holly Staker in Waukegan, Illinois. He was convicted twice on the basis of a confession that he said was coerced. No physical evidence linked him to the crime scene. In 2015 he received a $20 million settlement from Lake County, Illinois for wrongful conviction, formerly the largest settlement of its kind in United States history.

Investigative interviewing is a non-coercive method for questioning victims, witnesses and suspects of crimes. Generally, investigative interviewing "involves eliciting a detailed and accurate account of an event or situation from a person to assist decision-making". This interviewing technique is ethical and research based, and it stimulates safe and effective gathering of evidence. The goal of an investigative interview is to obtain accurate, reliable and actionable information. The method aims at maximising the likelihood of obtaining relevant information and minimise the risks of contaminating evidence obtained in police questioning. The method has been described as a tool for mitigating the use of torture, coercion and psychological manipulation, and for averting forced confessions and errors of justice leading to wrongful convictions and miscarriages of justice.

The PEACE method of investigative interviewing is a five stage process in which investigators try to build rapport and allow a criminal suspect to provide their account of events uninterrupted, before presenting the suspect with any evidence of inconsistencies or contradictions. It is used to obtain a full account of events from a suspect rather than just seeking a confession - which is the goal of the Reid technique, in which interrogators are more aggressive, accusatory, and threatening in terms of proposing consequences for the suspect's failure to confess to the crime.

Joseph P. Buckley is the president of John E. Reid and Associates, an American company based in Chicago, which trains law enforcement and others in The Reid Technique of Interviewing and Interrogation, which is focused on obtaining confessions.

References

  1. ↑ Orlando, James. "Interrogation Techniques". OLR Research Report. Retrieved November 30, 2023.
  2. 1 2 3 Kolker, Robert (May 24, 2016). "A Severed Head, Two Cops, and the Radical Future of Interrogation". Wired . Retrieved July 10, 2016.
  3. ↑ "The Third Degree | American Experience | PBS". www.pbs.org. Retrieved September 15, 2024.
  4. 1 2 Gallini, Brian (February 1, 2010). "Police "Science" in the Interrogation Room: Seventy Years of Pseudo-Psychological Interrogation Methods to Obtain Inadmissible Confessions". Hastings L.J.
  5. ↑ McInnis, Donald E. (July 21, 2019). "The History of the American System of Interrogation". History News Network. Retrieved September 15, 2024.
  6. ↑ Turner, Ralph F.; Goddard, Calvin (1953). "Review of Lie Detection and Criminal Interrogation". The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science. 44 (4): 550–552. doi:10.2307/1140118. ISSN   0022-0205.
  7. ↑ Goddard, Calvin. "THE SCIENTIFIC CRIME DETECTION LABORATORY Chicago's Answer to Mass Machine Gun Murder". chicagology.com. Retrieved September 15, 2024.
  8. ↑ Loyola University New Orleans, School of Law. Coming to PEACE with Police Interrogations: Abandoning the Reid Technique and Adopting the PEACE Method. - Free Online Library. II. THE REID TECHNIQUE AND ITS INHERENT ISSUES: The Free Library. Retrieved June 2, 2024.
  9. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Starr, Douglas (December 2, 2013). "The Interview: Do police interrogation techniques produce false confessions?". The New Yorker . pp. 42–49. Retrieved March 4, 2024.
  10. ↑ Inbau, Fred E.; Reid, John E; Buckley, Joseph P.; Jayne, Brian C (2011). Criminal Interrogation and Confessions (5 ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning. ISBN   978-0763799366.
  11. ↑ Cray, Ed (1968). "Criminal Interrogations and Confessions: The Ethical Imperative". Wisconsin Law Review. 1968: 173.
  12. ↑ Hirsch, Alan (March 1, 2014). "Going to the Source: The "New" Reid Method and False Confessions" (PDF). Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law. Archived from the original on August 25, 2020. Retrieved September 15, 2024.
  13. ↑ Gallini, Brian (February 2010). "Police 'Science' in the Interrogation Room: Seventy Years of Pseudo-Psychological Interrogation Methods to Obtain Inadmissible Confessions". Hastings Law Journal (61): 529. Retrieved March 24, 2020.
  14. ↑ Zulawski, David E.; Wicklander, Douglas E. (2001). Practical Aspects of Interview and Interrogation. Ann Arbor: CRC Press. ISBN   978-0-8493-0101-8.
  15. ↑ Kassin, S. M.; Appleby, S. C.; Perillo, J. T. (February 2010). "Interviewing suspects: Practice, science, and future directions". Legal and Criminological Psychology. 15: 39–55. doi: 10.1348/135532509X449361 . (preprint)
  16. ↑ Drizin, S. A.; Leo, R. A. (2004). "The problem of false confessions in the post-DNA world". North Carolina Law Review. 82: 891–1007. (preprint)
  17. ↑ Beck, Susan (March 2009). "Saving Anthony Harris". The American Lawyer. XXXI (3): 76–79, 90. Online at John E. Reid & Associates, Inc.
  18. ↑ "Gonzales v. State of Nevada" (PDF). Westlaw. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 20, 2016. Retrieved February 26, 2019.
  19. ↑ Rogal, Lauren (Winter 2017). "Protecting Persons with Mental Disabilities from Making False Confessions: The Americans with Disabilities Act as a Safeguard". New Mexico Law Review. 47 (1): 64–98. Retrieved February 26, 2019.
  20. ↑ Vrij, A. (1998). "Interviewing Suspects". In Memon, A.; Vrij, A.; Bull, R. (eds.). Psychology and Law: Truthfulness, Accuracy and Credibility. Maidenhead, UK: McGraw-Hill. pp. 124–144. ISBN   9780077093167. OCLC   924932857.
  21. ↑ Steinert, Ulf (2010). "Kriminalistik/Kriminaltechnik Skriptum: Vernehmungslehre" (PDF) (in German). Brandenburg State Police Academy and College. Retrieved June 1, 2018.
  22. ↑ Quan, Douglas (September 10, 2012). "Judge's ruling finds widely used police interrogation technique 'oppressive'". Canada.com.
  23. ↑ Baumann, Nick (December 20, 2013). "You'll never guess where this FBI agent left a secret interrogation manual". Mother Jones . Retrieved April 17, 2019.
  24. ↑ "Widely used police interrogation technique can result in false confession: Disclosure". CBC News. January 28, 2003. Retrieved July 30, 2015.
  25. 1 2 3 Quan, Douglas (July 30, 2015). "RCMP adopts gentler grilling of suspects". The StarPhoenix . Saskatoon. Retrieved January 13, 2015.
  26. ↑ Starr, Douglas (May 22, 2015). "Juan Rivera and the Dangers of Coercive Interrogation". The New Yorker.
  27. ↑ Gross, Terry (December 5, 2013). "Beyond Good Cop/Bad Cop: A Look at Real-Life Interrogations". Fresh Air . NPR . Retrieved October 13, 2016.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.