zone. Invasion by anyone else is anxiety producing, with anxiety increasing as
distance is reduced. When circumstances require our personal zone to be invaded –
for instance, in a crowded elevator, subway, or bus – we psychologically isolate
ourselves and tighten our muscles. In a crowded theater, we focus our attention to the
event and studiously ignore our neighbors. Given that this zone creates the greatest
anxiety and involves the strongest responses, much of the interrogation will take place
in this zone. Remember, the last territory a person can defend is what he is thinking –
it is the job of the interrogator to get inside that last place and effectively stop the
suspect’s resistance.
4. PREPARATION FOR THE INTERVIEW/INTERROGATION
31
2. Personal Distance ranges from 18 inches out to 4 feet. Dr. Hall calls the latter the “limit of
physical domination.” This is just outside touching distance, yet close enough for
some personal discussion to take place. The Forensic Assessment Interview will take
place in the outer limits of this zone.
3. Social Distance ranges from 4 to 12 feet. Four to 7 feet is the distance where we conduct
most of our informal transactions. Seven to 12 feet is where more formal social and
business relationships take place.
4. Public Distance is the furthest limit of our territorial zones. It ranges from 12 to 25 feet or
greater. These are teaching or public speaking distances. Still greater distances are of
marginal personal concern.
People feel threatened when they perceive their personal zone rules are violated. To test
this phenomenon yourself, during a meal start encroaching on your fellow diner’s territory
by slowly moving your silverware, condiments, drink glass, and so on, into their side of the
table. Observe how uncomfortable they appear to become. Better yet, imagine the anxiety
you would experience if you were sitting in an almost empty theater and someone you
did not know sat in the chair next to you.
Distance between the interviewer and suspect should be at the outer limits of the per-
sonal zone, approximately 4 feet away. This will ensure that the distance does not cause
the suspect to display unnatural defensive behavior, which could then be mistaken as
deceptive behavior or adaptors. During the interview, the only time we want to cause these
types of behaviors is if the suspect decides to attempt deception in answer to one of our
questions.
During the interrogation the interrogator should begin at a distance of 3 to 4 feet, with a
forward body lean, and slowly move into the suspect’s intimate zone (18 inches to contact)
each time he senses weakness in the suspect. Each movement forward should reduce the
distance between the interrogator and suspect until one of the interrogator’s knees is
between the suspect’s legs. This will increase anxiety and vulnerability and increase the
suspect’s desire to confess, if guilty. If not guilty, this invasion will harden the suspect’s
resistance.
Interview
Interrogation
Purpose is to gather information.
Purpose is to get a confession.
Nonaccusatory.
Accusatory.
Suspect speaks 95% of the time.
Suspect speaks 5% of the time.
Free flowing.
Structured.
Varied locations.
Interrogator has “home field” advantage.
Conducted in “Personal-Social Zone.”
Begins in “Personal,” ends in “Intimate Zone.”
Interviewers can take notes during the interview as long as their writing behavior and
affect are consistent. Any sudden change in writing behavior, whether one stops writing
or suddenly begins writing, will alert the suspect that there has been a change in the pro-
cess and subsequently affect his verbal and nonverbal behavior.
32
4. PREPARATION FOR THE INTERVIEW/INTERROGATION
During the interrogation, notes are not necessary: one is not gathering information.
Writing during the interrogation communicates to the suspect that the interrogator does
not have all the answers. If the interrogator is not sure whether the suspect did the crime,
why should the suspect admit to it? The interrogator only wants the suspect to nod
“Yes” to a leading question, such as, “Is that why you did it?” After obtaining the confirma-
tion of guilt, the interrogator can then document it.
Interview
Interrogation
Purpose is to gather information.
Purpose is to get a confession.
Nonaccusatory.
Accusatory.
Free flowing.
Structured.
Suspect speaks 95% of the time.
Suspect speaks 5% of the time.
Varied locations.
Interrogator has “home field” advantage.
Conducted in “Personal-Social Zone.”
Begins in “Personal,” ends in “Intimate Zone.”
Writing OK if consistent.
No writing until after suspect confesses.
As we lecture across the country, we ask participants when a suspect must be given
their “Miranda warnings.” It appears there is general understanding that “Miranda” does
not apply to private security. The Constitution protects citizens against government, not
against other citizens. “Miranda” only applies to governmental personnel, such as law
enforcement agents or agents of public agencies. When governmental personnel are
required to give “Miranda” seems unclear. We generally get three responses to this ques-
tion: if it is accusatory, if the investigation has focused on a single suspect, and if it is cus-
todial. According to the Supreme Court the test for “Miranda” is not based on whether the
communication is accusatory, or whether the investigation has focused on a single sus-
pect, but based solely on whether the situation would be viewed as “custodial” in the
mind of an average person. Therefore, it is not necessary to give a “Miranda warning”
(see Chapter 17, “Legal Considerations”) in an interview setting because it is not a custo-
dial situation. However, the fact is, the interviewer must give “Miranda” whenever his
agency requires it!
Interview
Interrogation
Purpose is to gather information.
Purpose is to get a confession.
Nonaccusatory.
Accusatory.
Free flowing.
Structured.
Suspect speaks 95% of the time.
Suspect speaks 5% of the time.
Varied locations.
Interrogator has “home field” advantage.
Conducted in “Personal-Social Zone.”
Begins in “Personal,” ends in “Intimate Zone.”
Writing OK if consistent.
No writing until after suspect confesses.
“Miranda” not legally required.
“Miranda” may be legally required.
4. PREPARATION FOR THE INTERVIEW/INTERROGATION
33
Many law enforcement agencies have suspects sign a visitors’ book when they arrive at
their location to show the voluntary nature of the interrogation. For many interrogators
“Miranda” creates a bigger psychological block than it does for the suspect. Too many inter-
ro
gators believe that once given “Miranda,” the suspect will not confess. This often results
in the self-fulfilling prophecy: “If I give “Miranda”, the suspect will not confess; because
the suspect will not confess, there is no reason to work hard to get a confession.” Because
the interrogator does not work hard, there is no confession, and “Miranda” is blamed.
The interviewer should maintain truthful open body positioning. His goal is not to
possibly contaminate the interview by exhibiting negative nonverbal behavior. There is
an evolutionary tendency for individuals in a submissive role to mimic the nonverbal
behavior of the dominant individual, nonverbally communicating, “I’m like you – please
like me.” Therefore, the suspect may unconsciously decide to mimic or parallel the inter-
viewer’s behavior. If this occurs and the interviewer is modeling defensive nonverbal
behavior, it will negatively affect the nonverbal assessment. The interviewer’s truthful non-
verbal behavior, on the other hand, will send a subconscious message to the suspect, which
will create openness and help establish rapport.
The interrogator also maintains truthful open body positioning. If the suspect mimics the
interrogator’s behavior, the nonverbal message to his brain will be open: to tell the truth. By
maintaining truthful nonverbal behavior, the interrogator communicates a more believable
verbal message to the suspect. Even though the suspect may never have read a book or
taken a course in detecting deception, he will have an innate sense that something is wrong
if there is a lack of consistency between the interrogator’s nonverbal and verbal behavior.
Therefore, consistency is crucial.
Interview
Interrogation
Purpose is to gather information.
Purpose is to get a confession.
Nonaccusatory.
Accusatory.
Free flowing.
Structured.
Suspect speaks 95% of the time.
Suspect speaks 5% of the time.
Varied locations.
Interrogator has “home field” advantage.
Conducted in “Personal-Social Zone.”
Begins in “Personal,” ends in “Intimate Zone.”
Writing OK if consistent.
No writing until after suspect confesses.
“Miranda” not legally required.
“Miranda” may be legally required.
Interviewer demonstrates truthful nonverbal behavior in both situations.
In an assessment interview, the interviewer is using a structured question format. Thus,
the average Forensic Assessment Interview takes approximately 20 to 30 minutes, this being
the limit to the average individual’s close attention span.
There is no time limit for an interrogation unless stipulated by law, such as Pennsylvania’s
“six-hour rule.” * The interrogator should take as long as necessary to get the confession. The
*Under the six hour rule, statements obtained more than 6 hours after an arrest should be suppressed to
guard against the coercive influence of custodial interrogation. See Commonwealth v. Davenport, 370 A.2d 301, 306 (Pa. 1977).
34
4. PREPARATION FOR THE INTERVIEW/INTERROGATION
interrogation is over when the suspect confesses, or requests the presence of an attorney.
Although the suspect is mentally encumbered with the cognitive process of deception and
threat of punishment, the bottom line is still a struggle for psychological dominance. The one
who gives up first is automatically the loser. The interrogator may tire, but so will the suspect,
and the interrogator has the advantage of being the controlling force.
Interview
Interrogation
Purpose is to gather information.
Purpose is to get a confession.
Nonaccusatory.
Accusatory.
Free flowing.
Structured.
Suspect speaks 95% of the time.
Suspect speaks 5% of the time.
Varied locations.
Interrogator has “home field” advantage.
Conducted in “Personal-Social Zone.”
Begins in “Personal,” ends in “Intimate Zone.”
Writing OK if consistent.
No writing until after suspect confesses.
“Miranda” not legally required.
“Miranda” may be legally required.
Interviewer demonstrates truthful nonverbal behavior in both situations.
Takes approximately 30 minutes.
No time limit.
The good interviewer/interrogator must apply his alertness and intelligence to under-
stand and assess the verbal and nonverbal behavior of the suspect. He must have patience
and perseverance and display an attitude both inwardly and outwardly of never giving up.
The first time the interrogator looks at his watch, or displays any behavior indicating that
he is under time constraints, or is tiring, he has lost; the suspect will realize that if he can
just hold out a little longer, he can escape. It is not unlike a psychological game of
“chicken,” boiling down to who flinches first.
The interrogator has the additional job of helping the guilty suspect find relief, a sense of
cleansing in confession. If the interrogator becomes judgmental, the supportive environ-
ment that helps the guilty suspect to confess will disappear. Therefore, there must be empa-
thy and rapport. Without rapport, empathy cannot be communicated; that is, the
interrogator must communicate that he has the ability to “walk a mile” in the other person’s
shoes, to feel the stress, conditions, and circumstances that were operating at the time of the
crime. The suspect needs to sense that his feelings, motivations, and fears are being under-
stood. Spending time developing this sense of mutuality and empathy will allow the guilty
suspect to set aside his adversarial posture, forget his fears, and be more forthcoming in this
supportive emotional environment.
The interrogator must sound and appear sincere. He must come from a helping position,
a position of genuine concern for the suspect and his predicament. He must believe that the
“truth” is the product of and answer for the suspect and must show the suspect how being
truthful will help him, not the interrogator.
To do that, the interviewer/interrogator must have the ability to communicate and relate
to a wide variety of people, to talk and deal with people from all walks of life, from the
unskilled laborer to the upper echelon executive, from the illiterate street person to the
SUMMARY
35
college professor. This presents the interviewer/interrogator with a language problem: he
must converse at a level of communication the suspect will comprehend, but at the same
time he must not appear artificial or patronizing. For example, after we conducted a semi-
nar on interviewing, one participant shared his problem in interrogating. The participant
was a middle-aged, college-educated African American who was a security director for a
major corporation. His manner was professional and his dress was impeccable. His prob-
lem was that although he had a very high success rate of obtaining confessions from white
suspects, he had a very poor success rate with minority suspects. When asked how he com-
municated with minorities, he replied, matter-of-factly, that he tried to mimic their ur
ban
street dialect: for instance, in the case of African Americans he would use, “S’up Bro?”
His usage of their dialect rang false! Ironically, he undermined his own credibility acting
like a street guy from the “hood,” something he obviously was not.
The good interviewer/interrogator constantly tries to obtain a better understanding of
human behavior. He never stops studying it or seeking higher levels of insight. Why do
people lie? Why do they decide to tell the truth? What obstacles must be removed to clear
the path for a confession? That makes him the good counselor he must be, because he is
counseling a person in making an extremely difficult decision: to tell the truth in spite of
the consequences that might accompany it. He must learn how to demonstrate the advan-
tages of telling the truth, while diminishing the suspect’s fear of punishment. He must
believe in truth; he must live it and model it for the suspect.
Thus, the successful interviewer/interrogator never sneers, ridicules, bullies, belittles,
acts prejudicial, antagonizes, ridiculously bluffs, loses his temper, or makes promises he
cannot keep. He is a professional, a seeker of truth. He has no axe to grind with the suspect.
He is not there to judge. He is fair, understanding, and a good listener. Most of all, he is in
control. He is the guide to lead the guilty person on a journey from denial to truth, and to
assure the innocent that his innocence will be confirmed. Remember, the best salespeople
are the ones who believe in the product they are selling. We sell truth!
SUMMARY
• To be a good interviewer/interrogator, you must be a good communicator.
• Interviews and interrogations are two separate processes.
• Mixing these two processes is the formula for failure. Remember the differences.
Reference
[1] E.T. Hall, The Silent Language, Hall Doubleday, New York, 1959.
C H A P T E R
5
Morgan Interview Theme Technique
(MITT)
The author of this interviewing technique, Raymond Morgan, started his law enforcement
career with the San Diego Police Department. After a number of years in street law
enforcement he went to work as a Criminal Investigator for the San Diego County district
attorney’s office. Assigned to the federally funded Organized Crime Unit, he began work-
ing motorcycle gangs as a facet of organized crime. His effectiveness in this endeavor led
Nathan J Gordon, William L Fleisher Page 7