PLANNING PREPARATION INTRODUCTION ACCOUNT QUESTIONS CLOSURE EVALUATION Planning Proper planning is the foundation to conducting a good interview. It is essential that you are clear as to what you want to achieve from the interview – what your aims are. There may be a need to test certain information already in your possession. There may be aspects of the crime that you are seeking to clarify or prove. You may need to establish whether a robust alibi exists or how this can be challenged. You may be searching for additional evidence and want to know where it might be secured. Being prepared increases the likelihood that you will be able to get the information that you need from the suspect. If you are not prepared, it is likely that you will “stumble” through the interview and convey a lack of confidence and certainty as to what you are doing. No matter how little time you think you have, you must always make time to prepare. To begin, ensure that you have as in-depth a knowledge of the crime being investigated as possible. This includes not only the circumstances of the case but also all the information available (forensics, statements, expert opinion) and a knowledge of the legal definition of the crimes under investigation including the proof needed to support a prosecution. You should also know as much as possible about the personal history of the suspect, including any criminal records. You will need to be adaptable as something may occur spontaneously in the interview that requires you to think and act immediately, perhaps requiring a different tactic. It is usually better to have two interviewers and ideally one should be female if you are interviewing a female suspect. However, this requires planning and agreeing on each role: who will make the introductions, who will provide the explanations, who will lead, when might the other interviewer intervene, etc. You need to plan for how you will respond to the suspect when they deny guilt, admit guilt or simply refuse to co-operate and remain silent. If the suspect denies being involved, is this because they claim to have been elsewhere at the time, or do they claim that they have been wrongly identified, or will they offer defences (for example, the stolen property was theirs, their actions were in self-defence, they were acting reasonably but were misinformed)? You need to consider possible responses from the suspect and how you will deal with these in your search for the “truth”. Plan your disclosure of evidence. At what juncture is it best for you to tell the suspect something of what you already know and seek their response? Page 22 ► A brief introduction to investigative interviewing