Interrogation in the intelligence and criminal context
Interrogation, both in the intelligence and criminal context, serves as a critical means of acquiring investigative information. However, what is mainly considered is that any form of information that is available should be of value, and it retain the value of the person being interviewed. As a result, just like any forensic scientist or a technical intelligence officer must conscientiously observe the principles of biology, chemistry, physics, mathematics, and computer science to efficiently collect and analyze electronics communication, images and numerous forms of trace evidence, criminal investigators and human intelligence collectors must equally practice diligent in ensuring that the method they apply to collect information adheres to all the principles of interrogation.
As a result, findings regarding the fallibility of the eyewitness accounts have made researchers come up with devise strategies for improving retrieval. The two primary strategies or the methods used are the cognitive interview and the violent interrogative method. However, the cognitive interview method, also referred to as the non-violent method, is assumed to be more beneficial than the violent interrogative method. Violent interrogative method is used by the police to acquire information about a crime through violent means. Consequently, cognitive interrogation is a technique used by the investigating officer harmoniously to gather information about the crime scene from the victim’s memories and the eyewitnesses. The human mind is made up of a network of associations other than the unconnected and discrete events; through this, it creates some ways trough which memories can be accessed and analyzed. Closely, let’s evaluates some of the benefits that the cognitive interrogation may have as compared to obtaining the information through the violent means.
The cognitive interrogation is specifically an appropriate information-gathering technique to acquire complete and accurate accounts from the interviewers. Specifically, the cognitive interview uses research-based principles critical in enhancing the three significant underlying psychological processes that are important in the process of information –gathering interviews. Notably, these three underlying psychological processes are the interviewees and the interviewer cognitive process, the social dynamics between the interviewer and the respondent, and lastly, the communication between the interviewees and the interviewers. A widespread field and laboratory study that has been conducted by various organizations all over the world is a clear indication that the cognitive interview is more effective. The study indicates that approximately 37% to 50% is acquired from cognitive interrogation and additional and detailed information as it may be compared to a typical structured interviews or police interviews. Additionally, research has also indicated that the use of cognitive tactics has significantly led to an enormous corporation and information discovery as compared to the accusation tactics. Through the cognitive interrogation, it is easy to enhance the relevant information provided by the interviewer.
The cognitive interview is an integrated, efficient memory recall technique that has expertly made use of the new questioning methodology.
It has become easier to acquire more accurate and detailed eye witness testimonies by using these.
Upon reviewing the police interview techniques and the psychological memory research, several ways have been identified that could negatively affect the eye witness. For example, the police questioning methodology through the use of violent means have often encouraged frequent jumps between memory modalities and incident recall in a non-chronological order. The use of cognitive interviews has enhanced all this as a non-violent means of interrogation. While initiating the cognitive interview, the interviewer has the responsibility to ensure that the witness feels relaxed and comfortable. Further, through the cognitive interrogation, the witness is given the opportunity of selecting the language that suits him or her. All this is aimed at ensuring the witness is encouraged at recreating to their external and internal conditions at the scene. Through the cognitive interview, the eye witness is in a suitable position of recalling the event backward and forward in time as well as recalling it from other people points of views. Through this method, the interviewer critically focuses on avoiding personal comments and to be non-judgmental throughout the interview. Specifically, this interview largely focuses on utilizing all the retrieval cues. All the details and events are outlined in different context that facilitates the retrieval of detailed information from the memories. It’s extremely difficult to acquire such accurate and detailed information by the use of torture and other violent means through a standard police.
While applied appropriately, the cognitive interview can result to numerous benefits a nd advantages. Since the technique is more detailed and structured, the detectives need to effectively train on how to lead and conduct the interrogation. By doing this, it is guaranteed that the witnesses will frequently report greater details required for useful testimony in their accounts. Over the years, the police have publically claimed that the technique has assisted them by providing them we a set of guidance criteria. Through the cognitive interrogation , the detectives are in a position of applying open ended questions such as when, what, how, who, where? Among others that allows the victims or the witnesses to be broad in their answers. Whereas some other interview techniques only forces the interviewees to be certain and biased unlike these kind of questions that provide a broad perspective of the scenario. This is quite important as the fragmented information that participants might have thought irrelevant is now brought into record and can assist in the investigation. This is clear that, cognitive interview helps in uncovering any information that previously might have not been remembered. Through the use cognitive interview, different cases concerning various crimes have been identified by providing critical evidence to support its success. By relying to other methods such as the violent mechanisms, it will be difficult to discover relevant facts and evidence.
As mentioned previously, harsh violent interrogation tactics has too been put into practices in evaluating the criminal justice. Notably, the harsh violent means involves the use of physical abuse, deprivation of medical, sleep and food attention. This form of mechanism is set mostly to acquire information from obstinate terrorist subjects. However, from the psychological theory and research done by different companies, it is evident that the harsh violent interrogation method is not effective at all. First, the hostile and the adversarial nature of the violent interrogation is usually inimical to the target of enhancing the recovery of information from the memory. Doing this reduces the chances that a subject will provide information that is detailed, extensive and accurate. Second, by using the harsh interrogation, there are high chances of increasing resistance by the subject other than creating an environment that will facilitate cooperation. Third, the harsh interrogation mechanism is linked to making the lying detection difficult. Eliciting verifiable details and analyzing speech content are the main dependable cues to assessing reliability. However, to bring out such cues, it’s mandatory that such subjects are required to provide extensive narratives that cannot take place in a harsh interrogation.
Under the harsh interrogation, several researchers have evaluated the use of torture as part of this mechanism. The ultimate view according to the researcher is that the use of coercion or torture often fails as an effective method of successful interrogation. By the use of torture, one tend to create a resistance subject a state of cooperation that might end up to a criminal of intelligence or criminal value. For example, in the year 2006, a research carried out by the United States Intelligence Science Board indicates that the use of torture weigh against the usefulness and effectiveness of the mechanism. Through the use of torture, it simply implies that there is pressure or coercion which otherwise increases the sources rebellion and determination not to comply. Psychological theory has well explained the reasons to why the use violent interrogation or torture often fails to engender cooperation. For, example, by closely evaluating a terror management case, through the use of this theory, it is automatic that people will become extremely linked to their believes when they are reminded of their death. Experimental data based on the consequences of torture on the elicitation of information from the occurrence of the events does exist. This data indicate a clear pattern that such conditions have adverse effects on the entire memory and recall. Generally, the violent mechanism as a mechanism for interrogation is threatening experience for subjects. While such problems are generated by these kinds of threatening conditions, it is always a problem while conducting an interview for the purpose of attaining of comprehensive and eliciting accurate information. When one is exposed to torture, there is a memory retrieval which is normally impaired under the stress. In such a situation, it is most likely that the witness may not be in a position of keeping memory hence inadequate supply of information.
Additionally, torture as violent interrogation mechanism can also be based in terms of pure principal reasons and the consequential reasons. Through torture, victims are treated as means to an end other than being treated as an end to themselves. This simply means that the witnesses are treated as things instead of being taken as human beings. Such an action is very inhuman and the body of a human being should not at all be used in this means but instead it should be treated with a lot of respect and not as means of achieving torture. It is very sad to note, that some society have used torture as means of suppressing some independent thought. They effectively manage this by converting the victims into right-thinking. Through this, the victims are completely tortured to a point that they completely abandon their own beliefs and views and instead adopt those one of the tortures. Cognitive interrogation is the best is the most suitable mechanism of acquiring detailed accurate information. The use of torture as a mechanism is inappropriate and it violates both human dignity and the rights of the victim. At long term, even those carrying out the torture are most likely to be affected and brutalized by their inhuman acts and desensitized to humanity. In conclusion and from what is discussed above, it clear that cognitive interrogation is the most beneficial mechanism of obtaining information.