PROBLEM 3
What is intelligent interviewing?
Definition of Human Intelligence (HUMINT):
● gathering of information by means of an interaction between two or more individuals
in order to improve national security.
● information related to past, present, and especially future
● information elicitation is a specific form of intelligence, since the source remains unaware of
the true effect of exchange (unawareness of giving information / not necessarily of being
interrogated)
Military vs Police Interrogations/Interviewing: similarities and differences
For the military, interrogation is defined as the manner of extracting the maximum amount of
accurate information in the least amount of time using legal means.
For the police, interrogation is defined as an accusatory monologue with the goals of eliciting
the truth and obtaining court-admissible confessions.
1). A main distinction is in their purpose. Military interrogations focus on gathering intelligence,
whereas police interrogations focus on gaining a confession.
2). Gathering intelligence is primarily focused on future events (e.g., prevent future terrorist
attacks) rather than on past events (e.g., crime that has already occurred).
3). Police interrogations are intended for guilty suspects (i.e., only after determining an individual
is deceptive), whereas military interrogators often question persons in the community tangentially
or suspected enemy terrorists.
4). The well-known within police circles Reid-technique training on interviewing is a 3-to 4-day
course (less preparation), whereas military interrogators undergo 16 weeks of training (more
preparation).
5). Their tactics diverge in the use of the direct approach. Because police interrogations are guilt-
presumptive, direct, non-leading questions are not advocated.
6). In the police interrogations there are institutional restraints on the behaviour of the officers,
which are meant to reduce coerciveness. In contrast, physical and psychological torture can be
employed during military interrogations.
7). In the civilian CJS evidence must be tested in an adversarial forum. In contrast, during times
of war, information extracted from interrogations may be acted upon quickly without slow
attempts to verify its accuracy.
8). In military interrogations the source is better at counter interrogation strategies to withhold
information compared to police interrogations in which the suspect is inexperienced in counter
interrogation
1
, 9). High cultural misunderstandings during military interrogations vs less cultural
misunderstandings during police interrogations
Military/Intelligent Police/Suspect
extract/gather intelligence/information accusatory > elicit confession
mostly future focused on future mostly focused on past
improve national security time pressure justice more time
source with guilty knowledge guilty suspect
categories of approaches in Army Field Manual: Direct approach, interrupt & disallow denials
direct approach, incentive approach, (direct questions aren’t advocated)
emotional approaches, rapid fire,
Mutt and Jeff (good cop/bad cop),
we know all approach, other approaches
Who, what, when & how mostly who
often elicitation of information awareness of suspect mostly not important
Physical force or torture No physical force (but at times harsh methods)
Source better at counter interrogation strategies Suspect inexperienced in counter interrogation
to withhold information
confession verification: acted upon confession needs to be tested
interrogators need long training no long training
and must fulfil requirements
1 day - years 1-16 hours = limited time
no Miranda Rights (not necessarily a “suspect”) Miranda rights
but international rules like Geneva Convention
false identity of interrogator more flexible false identity of interrogator less flexible
high cultural misunderstandings less cultural misunderstandings
more preparation less preparation
both rely on psychologically oriented tactics (e.g., rapport building)
Effectiveness and effects of torture
a Torture is defined by the UN as “any act by which severe pain of suffering,
whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as
obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession”.
a Euphemism: enhanced interrogation technique
a Basoglu (2009) study: 7 underlying factors:
sexual torture, physical torture, psychological manipulations, humiliating treatment,
forced stress positions, sensory discomfort, deprivation of basic needs
2
What is intelligent interviewing?
Definition of Human Intelligence (HUMINT):
● gathering of information by means of an interaction between two or more individuals
in order to improve national security.
● information related to past, present, and especially future
● information elicitation is a specific form of intelligence, since the source remains unaware of
the true effect of exchange (unawareness of giving information / not necessarily of being
interrogated)
Military vs Police Interrogations/Interviewing: similarities and differences
For the military, interrogation is defined as the manner of extracting the maximum amount of
accurate information in the least amount of time using legal means.
For the police, interrogation is defined as an accusatory monologue with the goals of eliciting
the truth and obtaining court-admissible confessions.
1). A main distinction is in their purpose. Military interrogations focus on gathering intelligence,
whereas police interrogations focus on gaining a confession.
2). Gathering intelligence is primarily focused on future events (e.g., prevent future terrorist
attacks) rather than on past events (e.g., crime that has already occurred).
3). Police interrogations are intended for guilty suspects (i.e., only after determining an individual
is deceptive), whereas military interrogators often question persons in the community tangentially
or suspected enemy terrorists.
4). The well-known within police circles Reid-technique training on interviewing is a 3-to 4-day
course (less preparation), whereas military interrogators undergo 16 weeks of training (more
preparation).
5). Their tactics diverge in the use of the direct approach. Because police interrogations are guilt-
presumptive, direct, non-leading questions are not advocated.
6). In the police interrogations there are institutional restraints on the behaviour of the officers,
which are meant to reduce coerciveness. In contrast, physical and psychological torture can be
employed during military interrogations.
7). In the civilian CJS evidence must be tested in an adversarial forum. In contrast, during times
of war, information extracted from interrogations may be acted upon quickly without slow
attempts to verify its accuracy.
8). In military interrogations the source is better at counter interrogation strategies to withhold
information compared to police interrogations in which the suspect is inexperienced in counter
interrogation
1
, 9). High cultural misunderstandings during military interrogations vs less cultural
misunderstandings during police interrogations
Military/Intelligent Police/Suspect
extract/gather intelligence/information accusatory > elicit confession
mostly future focused on future mostly focused on past
improve national security time pressure justice more time
source with guilty knowledge guilty suspect
categories of approaches in Army Field Manual: Direct approach, interrupt & disallow denials
direct approach, incentive approach, (direct questions aren’t advocated)
emotional approaches, rapid fire,
Mutt and Jeff (good cop/bad cop),
we know all approach, other approaches
Who, what, when & how mostly who
often elicitation of information awareness of suspect mostly not important
Physical force or torture No physical force (but at times harsh methods)
Source better at counter interrogation strategies Suspect inexperienced in counter interrogation
to withhold information
confession verification: acted upon confession needs to be tested
interrogators need long training no long training
and must fulfil requirements
1 day - years 1-16 hours = limited time
no Miranda Rights (not necessarily a “suspect”) Miranda rights
but international rules like Geneva Convention
false identity of interrogator more flexible false identity of interrogator less flexible
high cultural misunderstandings less cultural misunderstandings
more preparation less preparation
both rely on psychologically oriented tactics (e.g., rapport building)
Effectiveness and effects of torture
a Torture is defined by the UN as “any act by which severe pain of suffering,
whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as
obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession”.
a Euphemism: enhanced interrogation technique
a Basoglu (2009) study: 7 underlying factors:
sexual torture, physical torture, psychological manipulations, humiliating treatment,
forced stress positions, sensory discomfort, deprivation of basic needs
2
