The interviewer has a duty to ensure that interviews conducted are relevant and necessary to the main investigation. He should not take unnecessary interviews. The investigating officer must seek medical help only when it is needed to perform the criminal investigation. The victim has the right to be accompanied by a person chosen by the victim while the interview of such victim is taken. The police officer conducting the interview must ensure that the victim realizes such right. It is to be mentioned that according to the aforementioned code, that the victim makes no unnecessary contact with the suspect or their family (Dando et al. 2016). It can be said that the same person must take the interview of the victim unless the situation would adversely affect the investigation. Further it is to be stated that the interview of the victim must be conducted in a building which is designed and adopted for the same purpose. The interview to be conducted must be carried out by a person who is specially trained for the purpose. It is to be mentioned that that when interviewing a victim of a sexual or gender based violence, the victim has the right to choose to be interviewed by someone of the same gender as the victim.
It is to be mentioned that obtaining information from a suspect by interviewing them is vital for the purpose of conducting investigations. Suspected are to be interviewed in accordance to the PEACE model of interviewing. However an interviewer needs to assess whether the suspect falls in the vulnerable or intimidated category of suspetes prior to conducting interviews in guidance with the Achieving Best Evidence in Criminal Proceedings interview strategy.
Further in addition to the suspect charter the Human Rights Legislation states that all suspectes must be treated respect and integrity. The police officers conducting the interview must provide every suspect the basic human rights while conducting the interview (Smith 2018). The procedures to conduct interviews have to comply with the following provision of Human Rights Act 1998:
In addition the police Regulations 2012 and the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 are the two other legislations that govern the powers of the police in relation of conducting interviews. The provisions which are related to conducting interviews of suspects are contained in Code C of the PACE in sections 11-13. According to section 11.5 of the PACE it can be stated that an interviewer is not allowed to obtain any illicit statement from suspects by the use of oppression. According to the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 section 11.1A the solicitor of the accused person must be given sufficient information about the nature of offense of the accused person. However, the investigating officer is not required to reveal any information which he thinks might prejudice the criminal investigation.
Moreover, sections 36 and 37 of the Criminal Justice Public Order Act, 1994, states that in cases where a person is arrested by a constable or the police and when such constable or the police fails to make such person appear before the court and as a result asks such person to account for certain wrongdoings and if then such person fails or refuses to do so, the court may draw such inferences as appear proper.
The National Decision Model (NDM) is a model which is suitable for taking any decision and it must be used by everyone in policing. The NDM can be used by the decision makers for structuring a rationale of what was done during an incident and why and it can also be used for reviewing decisions, actions and to promote learning.
The NDM has six key elements, each providing the user with an area for consideration and focus. The Code of ethics, which is kept at the centre, binds the model together. The six elements are:
The NDM keeps the Code of Ethics at the heart of the policing decisions and distinguishes the NDM from other decision making models and also recognizes the need for all police decisions to be consistent with the principles and standards of behavior set out in the code.
CODE C of the PACE is another legal requirement for the purpose of interviewing suspects. The CODE C of the PACE contains the various rules and regulations which must be followed by the police, regarding the detention, treatment and questioning of the suspects. This CODE protects all such discriminations, harassments and other wrongs to a suspect, who is to be interviewed and sets the powers and obligations of the police in relation to such interview. This CODE C of the PACE is a mandatory requirement for interviewing suspects.
In 1991 the Home office formed a steering group to come up with an interview strategy. It can be stated that the primary objective for forming the steering group was to develop an effective interview strategy. The aforementioned group had come up with a model of interviewing, PEACE (Walsh and Bull 2015). PEACE stands for Planning and preparation, Engage and Explanation, Account and closure. The components of the interview strategy are enumerated below:
Planning the interview is the first step of the interview strategy. It can be said that the process of planning involves getting the interview ready to be conducted. However, preparation involves getting the location, environment and admin ready before the interview. The process of planning is essential as it helps the interviewer proceed in the right direction while conducting the interview. It also helps the interviewer prepare the right questions beforehand which are expected to obtain the relevant information for carrying on the process of the criminal investigation. It also ensures that the interviewer remains in control of the interview throughout the entire interview. However, it is to be mentioned that the level of preparation of the interview depends on the seriousness of the offense due to which the interview is to be conducted (Workman-Stark 2017). For example, the planning and preparation for interviewing a suspect charged with theft will differ from that in case of a suspect charged with murder.
The second important component of the interview strategy is the phase of engaging with the suspect and building a rapport with him. It can be said that in the opening phase the interviewer needs to warm up the suspect so that the interviewer can engage in a relaxed relationship with the suspect and the same lasts for the entire time span of the interview. The interviewer should ensure according to this framework that a relaxed atmosphere is maintained throughout the entire interview. The interviewer must be polite with the suspect and must maintain courtesy (Walsh and Bull 2015). The interviewer must also be considerate about the situation of the suspect and must explain to the suspect the importance of the statements given by him. For example, a suspect, who is being interviewed for a murder case, may not be reluctant in giving the interview and may be afraid of providing certain information. The interviewer must make a rapport with suspect and make him feel relaxed so that he can feel secured and provide all the true information. The interviewer must not put pressure or use any such strategies that would make the suspect more tensed.
It is to be mentioned that in this stage of conducting the interview, the interviewer is required to receive all the accounts of the events which are provided by the suspect. The main steps to be taken in this stage are enumerated below:
Good questioning and listening skills are required to be possessed by the interviewer which is essential in obtaining reliable and accurate information. It is to be mentioned that during the interview process, the interviewer may come across the need to turn uncooperative to counter and challenge the events as described by the suspect. Therefore, he needs to be attentive throughout the interview.
For the purpose of conducting cooperative interviews, the interviewer is required to start the interview using the free recall technique and the switch to cognitive technique to obtain information which cannot be obtained easily.
It has been noted in most cases that interviews are wrapped in a hurry. The reason for hurrying to wrap up the interview can be viewed as the tendency of the suspects to admit charges advertently for a short term of relief anticipated by them. However, it is to be said that during this concluding phase of the interview the following issues are to be focused on:
The evaluation stage is considered to be the final and concluding stage of the interview. In this stage of the aforementioned strategy the interviewer is allowed to take short breaks to examine the notes made during the process of the interview. The interviewer will also check if the objectives and the aims of the interview are fulfilled.
It can be mentioned that during the planning and preparation phase, the resources which are required to develop a strategy are identified. Such resources are applied in preparing the interview strategy (App.college.police.uk 2018). It is to be mentioned that the objectives and aims of the interview are considered in this phase and all the relevant information required to identify the issues to be covered in the interview are assessed in this stage. Therefore the following are the most important resources which help in formulating the interview strategy:
Interview plan- It is the primary essential resource that assists in developing an interview strategy. A well drafted interview plan allows the interviewer to first review the results of the investigations that have been conducted and in light of the results prepare the questions to be asked in the interview. It also helps the interviewer identify and consider all the necessary and relevant materials which are important to carry out such investigation. The interview plan enables the interviewer to formulate the aims and objectives of the interviews to be conducted. In this stage the relevant questions that might be asked by the interviewer are:
It is to be mentioned that having a record of the characteristics of the persons to be interviewed is important prior to conducting the interview. It can be mentioned that relevant information about the persons to be interviewed will include the points as follows:
Practical arrangements are also instrumental in planning the interview strategy. It is to be said that the interviewer needs to have practical considerations to assess the circumstance the individual was in prior to conducting the interview (McDougall and Bull 2015). Important examples of practical arrangements include visiting the crime scene, fixing time of the interview, having the proper knowledge of the offense due to which the interview is to be conducted.
In England and Wales, statements made by the suspects in an interview must be recorded on a MG11. This is another resource used for developing an interview strategy. The original copies of all suspect statements must be kept in a case file and must be send to the Crown Prosecution Service (Fairclough and Jones 2017). While drafting a suspect statement, it must be taken care of that it is concise and to the point, it deals with only those matters about which the suspect has direct knowledge and the statement is in the words of the suspect. In a MG11 statement, the suspect must sign in all the necessary sheets and pages of the statement and in case it is discovered that a suspect has committed a crime or is a potential suspect, then the interviewer must treat the suspect under caution.
This is another resource for deciding the strategy of investigation interview. The PIP has the following levels, based on the type of investigation interview to be conducted:
The strategies for an investigation depends on the type of crime and based on that the levels of the PIP are used accordingly (Oxburgh et al. 2016).
Important suspectes are often referred to as key suspectes. Therefore, the guidance required to interview is provided by the Achieving Best Evidence in Criminal Proceedings. Important suspect or a key suspect is said to be a person who has suspected an indictable offense or has been closely associated with such offence. The key suspectes can have a special relationship with the victim.
It is to be noted that only suspects are not interviewed, but other people who are related to the offence committed or to the suspects or the victims are also interviewed. Some of the examples of such related other people are:
There are certain types of approved interview techniques, which the police use for making investigation interviews with suspects. They are:
The visual cue technique or method focuses on the nonverbal communication such as eye contact or the body posture. The visual cues method relies on the practical experiences and skills of the interviewing officer and the expertise of the suspect in dissembling (Sanoff 2016).
This method or technique focuses on both the speech and visual related cues, such as hesitation in speech or degree of eye contact. The main idea behind this technique is to compare an suspect’s verbal and nonverbal responses during informal conversation, before the actual interview, which also include their responses (Strady et al. 2017).
The Behavioral Analysis Interview technique or the BAI also focuses on the verbal and nonverbal responses of suspects, but to specific questions only. The BAI has also been described as a testing of nerves of the suspects (Hu Bai and Guan 2017).
This technique involves the method of having the suspect recount his story in reverse order. The first studies were established that demonstrated the effectiveness of the reverse recall technique in 2007 and it is already being used by the law enforcement of the UK and the US. The basic idea of this technique is to increase the cognitive load of the suspect, making it hard to dissemble without giving nonverbal cues (Ewens et al. 2016).
The cognitive interview technique aims at interviewing suspectes and suspects and the idea behind this technique is helping the suspectes to recollect matters in as much detail as possible, and generally to recreate the context of the event for simulating the suspect’s memory. The usage of this technique helps the interviewer to encourage suspects in expressing their feeling as this technique is a very informal technique. There is no compulsion under this technique to continue the interview in case the suspect gets distressed or becomes emotional (Bowling 2014). Due to the flexibility, leniency, and by results in various cases, it can be said that this technique has proven to be a very effective technique in getting the suspectes and suspects to recall important details, which help in solving crimes.
The Conversation management is another technique that is used in an interview for of a suspect. This technique provides for an open minded approach for evaluating information form a suspect that can be tested against the information that has been already established for finding out whether the account is truthful. This technique acts as a simple user friendly guide for obtaining accurate and reliable information for discovering the truth of any incident by identifying the offenders. This technique involves the following phases while conducting an interview:
Although the cognitive technique of interviewing is a flexible and a lenient one, it mainly depends on the memory factor of the suspect. But in the conversation management technique there is already an established information which is not disclosed to the suspect and the account of the suspect is compared to it for determining the truth. Therefore, it can be said that the cognitive technique the information cannot be perfect as it is solely on the memory factor of the suspect, but in the CM truth of the information is certain due to the already existing information.
It is to be stated that interviewers conduct interviews in order to obtain relevant and substantial information about the offenses which are committed. The main aim of conducting interviews is to obtain relevant evidence which can substantiate the charges that have been brought against the suspects in relation to the crimes or offenses committed. According to Nhan (2014), it can be said that interviewing suspects and suspectes can be a difficult process. The interviewer must conduct the interview maintaining the highest standards possible. An interview may also be conducted to provide important and relevant information to the suspectes and victims. Examples of such information include suspect protection, protection of identity and court procedures. The interviewer must ensure that he establishes a relationship with the suspect. He must decide the interview strategy to be followed such as the PEACE model. Interviewer must conduct the interview in a methodical manner and must also decide which would be the most suitable location to conduct the interview. For example, if a suspect is accused of theft, the interviewer must not be aggressive with the suspect. He must build a rapport with the suspect and find out why the person has done so or the reasons behind the person committing the theft and all other relevant information without creating any sort of fear in the suspect.
Time, location and environment are important factors, which are to be considered for the purpose of conducting interview of suspects (Tekin et al. 2015). With regards to the timing, interviews must be conducted as early as possible for minimizing the risk of memory contamination and for investigation purposes as well (Spradley 2016). The decision regarding the time of conducting an interview must be made taking into consideration the following factors:
Interview must be delayed in cases where the interview is traumatized or not ready. The requirements of the suspect must also be given preference as some, in order to get it over with, wants to get interviewed immediately and some does not. For e.g. in cases like that of family violence, victims provide better information if they are interviewed immediately (Bruquiet ijnes et al. 2015). The suspectes, in such cases, must be interviewed as close as reasonably possible, to the event, in order to complete the investigation urgently.
Another important aspect or factor, which must be considered while conducting an interview, is location (Davis et al. 2014). The place, where an interview is held, must be characterized with the following:
Therefore, a place interview should have the necessary aids and equipments and must also ensure the confidentiality of the suspect’s information. The place must ensure that the suspect is comfortable enough for giving the interview.
The location of an interview is very important because many interviews are such which are required to be held on roads or inside cells, based on the urgency of the interview. Therefore, the place of interview is a vital condition for the outcome of an interview.
With regards to the environment of the interview, it must be ensured that the suspect feels safe in providing any information. No pressure should be put or created on the suspect for deducing any information (Abbe and Brandon 2014). In short, the environment must ensure that it helps the suspect in providing with the best information or evidence.
Hence, it can be said that the timing, location and the environment are important aspects or factors that must be considered before conducting an interview with suspects for investigation purposes.
There can be various contingencies, which may arise during an interview with a suspect or suspect. The following are the few contingencies that can arise during an interview:
A situation may arise that a suspect, who is to be interviewed, turns out to be of hostile behavior. These suspectes are known as hostile suspects. These people are believed to have suspectes and offence, part of an offence or are closely connected to such offence and are against the investigation process or are biased against the examining party. The reason for their appearance as defense suspectes in courts is either their close relationship with the accused party, or their lifestyle (Schönenberg and Jusyte 2014). Some of them refuse to give statements and some give false information.
Third party support may be beneficial in some cases, provided that such support is not connected with the interview or investigation.
To overcome the welfare issues, the intermediary scheme is one way to overcome the welfare issue in an interview. This scheme states that all suspects are vulnerable and they can obtain help from an intermediary (Crane et al. 2016). If there is any problem regarding communication in an interview, an intermediary can be appointed for solving such issues and help the suspect in giving the best evidence.
Suspect intimidation is another method of solving welfare issues. This method offers the suspect a service in relation to their requirements that will make them more likely to give evidence in courts (Walsh et al. 2017).
Reluctant behavior
Reluctant behavior of the suspect can be another contingency that may arise. Suspectes with such behavior are usually reluctant to get involved in the investigation process (Hershkowitz Lamb and Katz 2014). The reasons, which leads to their reluctant behavior, are:
In case of reluctant suspect, all relevant information must be provided to such suspect. Particulars about whatever the suspect has seen or specific details of the allegation shall not be discussed. No pressure must be made on the suspect for providing with evidence. The work of the investigator would be simply giving the suspect enough information for deciding to provide with assistance or not. Anything said or any contact should be recorded and kept.
In cases of reluctant suspectes, the investigator must inform the CPS about such suspect, as it is possible for the prosecutor to apply for a suspect who summons secure their attendance.
Another contingency that may arise, is a suspect may refuse to make any statement to an investigator (Hess Orthmann and Cho 2016). In such cases, the CPS must be informed about such suspect, who had been interviewed, but had refused to provide any statement.
In cases like this, the investigator must outline the details of the material provided by the suspect, along with all copies of any notes or statements that the suspect had refused to sign. All relevant information must be provided to the CPS, as the suspect can be called as a defense suspect later on.
Another contingency that may arise during a suspect interview is issues relating to the health of the suspect. It is possible that an suspect suffers from any heath issues, which can crop up at the middle of an interview and he or she may fall sick (Bowling 2014).
To solve this issue, the interviewer must gather knowledge and information and firstly ensure whether the suspect has any health issues or not, which can occur at the time of an interview. After ensuring about such issues, the interviewer must conduct the interview accordingly and ask questions, keeping in mind the health issues of the suspect. In such cases light questions must be asked and necessary aid, equipments and facilities must be kept ready at the time of interview for preventing the occurrence of such health issues.
In case of suspect interviews, the interviewers assume responsibility for the suspects. There are certain procedures and reasons for assuming such responsibilities (Schafer and Navarro 2016). Some of them are:
One of the reasons of assuming the responsibility of the suspects is to ensure their escorting is secured. The interviewer is the one who conducts the interview and he is the sole person in charge of everything related to an interview (Lowe 2016). Therefore, it becomes the responsibility of the interviewer or it is assumed that it is the interviewer’s responsibility to ensure that the suspect or the suspect is escorted safely from the place of interview.
Another reason for which the interviewer assumes the responsibility for the suspect is for ensuring the welfare and security of the suspect. As stated earlier, the interviewer is solely in charge of the interview (Napier 2017). Therefore, it becomes his responsibility to see that the well-being of the interviewing suspect is not harmed in any way and that the suspect is safe throughout the interview and even after the interview.
The suspects are brought for interview by the officers, under whose custody the suspect is detained. Therefore, another reason for the interviewers to assume responsibility of the suspect is to ensure that the suspect, after the interview, is safely and securely handed over to the officer who is in charge of the suspect’s custody (O’Neill 2017). The interviewer assumes this responsibility because it is the interviewer who is in complete charge of the suspect during the interview.
The PACE provides the following rights and entitlements to a suspect while interviewing or while in detention:
These rights are also reasons why interviewers assume responsibility of a suspect.
Under the PACE, a custody officer has certain powers and duties in relation to the suspect and that is why he assumes responsibility of the suspect as well. These duties are:
Ethical behavior is based on knowing the difference between what is legal and what is moral. The interviewer is solely responsible for conducting and interview and for deciding the methods to be employed for the interview. Therefore, it can be said that it is the interviewer’s conscience that acts as a benchmark (Pope 2015).
The interviewer has a duty to adhere to ethical standards while conducting an interview, regardless of the alleged offence or unsavory personality of the suspect. The suspect, criminal justice system or the immediate situation does not control the interviewer’s behavior. It is the interviewer himself who controls it.
Interviews are built on the information gathered by all possible resources. All possible methods and techniques are used by the interviewer for obtaining information and for taking out valid and reliable facts. It has become evident with time that any information that is obtained by the use of coercive method or technique is unreliable. There is no justified reason for suppressing or obtaining falsely, any relevant information. Real hard work is required to conduct an interview and no excuse, including disinterest or fatigue, ethically allows shortcuts interviews (Tekin et al. 2015). Interviewing suspects help in obtaining better evidence, which in return results in getting valid information about the suspect. The English Judicial System also focuses on the fact that whether or not the police behave in a fair manner towards the vulnerable suspects, such as those having special needs or low negligence.
It has been seen in various cases that the police use deception as method for extracting information and confessions before the court. False promises and misleading a suspect for making confessions are examples of deception (Vanderhallen and Vervaeke 2014). These methods are considered as unethical rather than illegal behavior.
It is very much necessary to conduct suspect interview, both ethically and effectively. In criminal cases, interviews are conducted for deducing or extracting the real facts of the case and in order to gather evidence for bringing out the truth for providing justice. It is not the ethical measures and standards which should be maintained while conducting an interview, but all such methods must be used, which are effective as well i.e. must bring out all relevant and necessary information (Meissner Kelly and Woestehoff 2015). Hence, the use of both, ethical and effective investigation methods are important while conducting a suspect interview.
It is to be mentioned that according to the human rights standards, in case of interviewing of suspects, it is very important to maintain the ethical standards. It is so because the human rights standards state that everyone has the right to security of person, a fair trial personal privacy, home and family, without any interference. Furthermore, the human rights states that no one shall be subject to any unlawful attacks on his or her honor or reputation and no physical or mental pressure shall be exerted on a suspect for obtaining information. Torture and inhuman behavior is absolutely prohibited by the human rights standards and suspects must be treated with compassion and consideration and care and confidentiality must be exercised in handling sensitive information all the times (Vanderhallen and Vervaeke 2014).
Abbe, A. and Brandon, S.E., 2014. Building and maintaining rapport in investigative interviews. Police practice and research, 15(3), pp.207-220.
App.college.police.uk. (2018). Investigative interviewing. [online] Available at: https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/investigations/investigative-interviewing/ [Accessed 21 Jan. 2018].
Bacon, M., 2014. Police culture and the new policing context. The future of policing, pp.103-119.
Bowling, A., 2014. Research methods in health: investigating health and health services. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
Bowling, A., 2014. Research methods in health: investigating health and health services. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
Bruijnes, M., Linssen, J., op den Akker, R., Theune, M., Wapperom, S., Broekema, C. and Heylen, D., 2015. Social behaviour in police interviews: Relating data to theories. In Conflict and Multimodal Communication (pp. 317-347). Springer International Publishing.
Cordner, G., 2014. Community policing. The Oxford handbook of police and policing, pp.148-171.
Crane, L., Maras, K.L., Hawken, T., Mulcahy, S. and Memon, A., 2016. Experiences of autism spectrum disorder and policing in England and Wales: Surveying police and the autism community. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 46(6), pp.2028-2041.
Crank, J.P., 2014. Understanding police culture. Routledge.
Crawford, A. and Evans, K., 2017. Crime prevention and community safety (pp. 797-824). Oxford University Press.
Creswell, J.W. and Poth, C.N., 2017. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage publications.
Dando, C.J., Geiselman, R.E., MacLeod, N. and Griffiths, A., 2016. Interviewing adult suspectes and victims. Communication in investigative and legal contexts: Integrated approaches from forensic psychology, linguistics and law enforcement, pp.79-106.
Davis, R.C., Jensen, C.J., Burgette, L. and Burnett, K., 2014. Working smarter on cold cases: Identifying factors associated with successful cold case investigations. Journal of forensic sciences, 59(2), pp.375-382.
European Convention on Human Rights 1999 – 2000
Ewens, S., Vrij, A., Mann, S. and Leal, S., 2016. Using the Reverse Order Technique with Non?Native Speakers or Through an Interpreter. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30(2), pp.242-249.
Fairclough, S. and Jones, I., 2017. The victim in court. Handbook of Victims and Victimology.
Gov.uk. (2018). Appropriate adults: guide for youth justice professionals – GOV.UK. [online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/appropriate-adults-guide-for-youth-justice-professionals [Accessed 21 Jan. 2018].
Hershkowitz, I., Lamb, M.E. and Katz, C., 2014. Allegation rates in forensic child abuse investigations: Comparing the revised and standard NICHD protocols. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 20(3), p.336.
Hess, K.M., Orthmann, C.H. and Cho, H.L., 2016. Criminal investigation. Cengage Learning.
Hu, W., Bai, J. and Guan, H., 2017. Investigation on a method of increasing mortise and tenon joint strength of a fast growing wood. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 39(4), pp.101-107.
Human Rights Act 1998
Leese, M., 2017. Mental Health, Vulnerability & Risk in Police Custody. Journal of Adult Protection, The.
Lowe, D., 2016. The Suspect Interview in Counter-Terrorism Investigations. FOCUS ON TERRORISM, p.87.
McDougall, A.J. and Bull, R., 2015. Detecting truth in suspect interviews: the effect of use of evidence (early and gradual) and time delay on criteria-based content analysis, reality monitoring and inconsistency within suspect statements. Psychology, Crime & Law, 21(6), pp.514-530.
Meissner, C.A., Kelly, C.E. and Woestehoff, S.A., 2015. Improving the effectiveness of suspect interrogations. Annual review of law and social science, 11, pp.211-233.
Nagin, D.S., Solow, R.M. and Lum, C., 2015. Deterrence, criminal opportunities, and police. Criminology, 53(1), pp.74-100.
Napier, M.R., 2017. Behavior, truth and deception: Applying profiling and analysis to the interview process. CRC Press.
Nhan, J., 2014. Police culture. The Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice.
O’Neill, D.S., 2017. From third-degree to third-generation interrogation strategies: putting science into the art of criminal interviewing (Doctoral dissertation, Monterey, California: Naval Postgraduate School).
Oxburgh, L., Gabbert, F., Milne, R. and Cherryman, J., 2016. Police officers’ perceptions and experiences with mentally disordered suspects. International journal of law and psychiatry, 49, pp.138-146.
Pope, K.S., 2015. Are the American Psychological Association’s Detainee Interrogation Policies Ethical and Effective?. Zeitschrift für Psychologie.
Sanoff, H., 2016. Visual Research Methods in Design (Routledge Revivals). Routledge.
Schafer, J.R. and Navarro, J., 2016. Advanced interviewing techniques: Proven strategies for law enforcement, military, and security personnel. Charles C Thomas Publisher.
Schönenberg, M. and Jusyte, A., 2014. Investigation of the hostile attribution bias toward ambiguous facial cues in antisocial violent offenders. European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience, 264(1), pp.61-69.
Smith, R., 2018. International Human Rights Law. Oxford University Press.
Spradley, J.P., 2016. The ethnographic interview. Waveland Press.
Strady, E., Dang, V.B.H., Némery, J., Guédron, S., Dinh, Q.T., Denis, H. and Nguyen, P.D., 2017. Baseline seasonal investigation of nutrients and trace metals in surface waters and sediments along the Saigon River basin impacted by the megacity of Ho Chi Minh (Vietnam). Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24(4), pp.3226-3243.
Tekin, S., Granhag, P.A., Strömwall, L., Giolla, E.M., Vrij, A. and Hartwig, M., 2015. Interviewing strategically to elicit admissions from guilty suspects. Law and human behavior, 39(3), p.244.
Tekin, S., Granhag, P.A., Strömwall, L., Giolla, E.M., Vrij, A. and Hartwig, M., 2015. Interviewing strategically to elicit admissions from guilty suspects. Law and human behavior, 39(3), p.244.
Vanderhallen, M. and Vervaeke, G., 2014. Between investigator and suspect: The role of the working alliance in investigative interviewing. In Investigative interviewing (pp. 63-90). Springer New York.
Vanderhallen, M. and Vervaeke, G., 2014. Between investigator and suspect: The role of the working alliance in investigative interviewing. In Investigative interviewing (pp. 63-90). Springer, New York, NY.
Walsh, D. and Bull, R., 2015. Interviewing suspects: Examining the association between skills, questioning, evidence disclosure, and interview outcomes. Psychology, crime & law, 21(7), pp.661-680.
Walsh, D., Oxburgh, G.E., Redlich, A.D. and Myklebust, T. eds., 2017. International Developments and Practices in Investigative Interviewing and Interrogation: Volume 1: Victims and suspectes. Routledge.
Wolf, R., Pepper, I. and Dobrin, A., 2017. An exploratory international comparison of professional confidence in volunteer policing. The Police Journal, 90(2), pp.91-106.
Workman-Stark, A.L., 2017. Understanding Police Culture. In Inclusive Policing from the Inside Out (pp. 19-35). Springer International Publishing.
Essay Writing Service Features
Our Experience
No matter how complex your assignment is, we can find the right professional for your specific task. Contact Essay is an essay writing company that hires only the smartest minds to help you with your projects. Our expertise allows us to provide students with high-quality academic writing, editing & proofreading services.
Free Features
Free revision policy
$10Free bibliography & reference
$8Free title page
$8Free formatting
$8How Our Essay Writing Service Works
First, you will need to complete an order form. It's not difficult but, in case there is anything you find not to be clear, you may always call us so that we can guide you through it. On the order form, you will need to include some basic information concerning your order: subject, topic, number of pages, etc. We also encourage our clients to upload any relevant information or sources that will help.
Complete the order form
Once we have all the information and instructions that we need, we select the most suitable writer for your assignment. While everything seems to be clear, the writer, who has complete knowledge of the subject, may need clarification from you. It is at that point that you would receive a call or email from us.
Writer’s assignment
As soon as the writer has finished, it will be delivered both to the website and to your email address so that you will not miss it. If your deadline is close at hand, we will place a call to you to make sure that you receive the paper on time.
Completing the order and download
