Suspect Interviewing and Interrogation
A law enforcement officer should observe relevant legal guidelines when interrogating a suspect who voluntarily chooses to cooperate. Essentially, statements obtained in observance of these legal considerations are more likely to be deemed admissible in law courts than those resulting from unethical procedure. Similarly, an interrogator ought to choose effective questioning techniques that will lead to obtaining facts from a suspect (Department of Criminal Justice Training (DCJT), 2005).
Legal Issues Associated with Interviews and Interrogations
Firstly, it is imperative to inform the suspect, prior to commencement of the interrogation, his rights as outlined in the case of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). The Miranda rights include the right to remain silent; right to consult a lawyer prior to making any statements and lawyer’s presence during the interrogation, and the right to be accorded an attorney if one cannot afford one. Additionally, the interrogator should inform the suspect that any statements made can and may be used against them in court, and also that they can abort the questioning at any time before its conclusion (DCJT, 2005). These Miranda rights are guaranteed by the U.S. constitution in the Fifth and …show more content…
Firstly, the factual analysis involves compilation of a suspect’s specific observations with regards to bio-social status and the crime scene. The second step would be to conduct a behaviour analysis interview, whose main purpose is to detect the suspect’s reaction when telling the truth, and when lying (Orlando, 2014). For instance, the suspect may be asked, “What do you do in your leisure time?” Consequently, the interrogator may assess the reaction, having had to assess the person’s background in advance (Leo,
A law enforcement officer should observe relevant legal guidelines when interrogating a suspect who voluntarily chooses to cooperate. Essentially, statements obtained in observance of these legal considerations are more likely to be deemed admissible in law courts than those resulting from unethical procedure. Similarly, an interrogator ought to choose effective questioning techniques that will lead to obtaining facts from a suspect (Department of Criminal Justice Training (DCJT), 2005).
Legal Issues Associated with Interviews and Interrogations
Firstly, it is imperative to inform the suspect, prior to commencement of the interrogation, his rights as outlined in the case of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). The Miranda rights include the right to remain silent; right to consult a lawyer prior to making any statements and lawyer’s presence during the interrogation, and the right to be accorded an attorney if one cannot afford one. Additionally, the interrogator should inform the suspect that any statements made can and may be used against them in court, and also that they can abort the questioning at any time before its conclusion (DCJT, 2005). These Miranda rights are guaranteed by the U.S. constitution in the Fifth and …show more content…
Firstly, the factual analysis involves compilation of a suspect’s specific observations with regards to bio-social status and the crime scene. The second step would be to conduct a behaviour analysis interview, whose main purpose is to detect the suspect’s reaction when telling the truth, and when lying (Orlando, 2014). For instance, the suspect may be asked, “What do you do in your leisure time?” Consequently, the interrogator may assess the reaction, having had to assess the person’s background in advance (Leo,