: Susan E. Brandon, Simon Wells
: Science-Based Interviewing 2nd Edition
: BookBaby
: 9798317800109
: Science-Based Interviewing
: 1
: CHF 10.50
:
: Pädagogik
: English
: 224
: kein Kopierschutz
: PC/MAC/eReader/Tablet
: ePUB
This book is intended to help law enforcement officers and intelligence agents interview people (criminal suspects, witnesses, victims, or intelligence sources) who are assumed to have information relevant to an event in the past (e.g., a bank robbery) or an event in the future (e.g., intentions to bomb a shopping mall). In fact, the methods have broad application: they also are relevant to attorneys, Human Resource agents, insurance investigators, and bank auditors - to anyone with similar needs to acquire information from human sources in a reliable manner. The book provides specific, step-by-step advice for such interviews, from planning for the interview to closing an interview. The contents of the book are based on current science.

Simon Wells previously served with London's Metropolitan Police, retiring as a Detective Chief Inspector after 30 years' service. Accredited as an Offender profiler, he has profiled over 1000 cases, working throughout the world supporting investigations and operations. He was Course Director of the U.K. National Hostage Crisis Negotiation Course and Head of Operations for Crisis Negotiation in London. Between 2008 and 2013 he was seconded to the U.K.'s Civil Service to support the counter-terrorism effort within the U.K., Iraq, Afghanistan and other theatres of operation. Most recently he has been supporting the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG) interrogation training, and currently is the Research to Practice Fellow for the Centre for Research and Evidence in Security and Threat (CREST) at Lancaster University (U.K.) and a Visiting Professor at Coventry University.

CHAPTER 2:PLANNING:THE BOARDS


We often hear interviewers (including police officers) say that they don’t have time to plan for an interview. But take a moment to think about what can go wrong in an investigation if erroneous or incomplete information is collected – how many wrong paths may be taken. In the long run, near-term planning translates into a greater likelihood of long-term success. What we know is that when an interview is not planned, (1) errors will be made that will impede the progress of an investigation, and (2) opportunities will be missed that could have facilitated the investigation (seeChapter 3, Errors and Opportunities).

The Boards is a method of planning for an interview. The term, “the Boards,” comes from the fact that much of this planning is conducted via poster boards or white boards so that the whole interview team can view what is written and share in the planning.

The Boards provides a method for organizing and updating what we know (case facts), identifying objectives, and deciding what we think information means as the interview proceeds. The Boards are continually updated, producing a log and a visual representation of progress and reminders of issues to follow up on or issues to avoid. The Boards also provide a framework for team roles and activities in support of an interview.

The Boards help the team think through four key topics:

1. What do we know? – Collect and collate the verified facts surrounding a subject we may be interviewing. Verified facts are those collected from trusted databases (e.g., court, employment, or bank records; License Plate Reader, GPS tracker).

2. What information do we need to verify? – Collect and collate additional information (“information”) that has yet to be verified. This may be information from victims, witnesses, sources, or social media; it may include details of items reportedly collected at a site but not yet examined.

3. What do we think? – Identify inferences the team is making based on both the verified and the yet-to-be-verified information.

4. What do we do? – Depending on the information and inferences, determine (i) information gaps and (ii) interview objectives.

What does the science say?

The Boards methodology per se has never been explicitly tested. However, the components of the Boards have support in research on teamwork, hypothesis testing and decision making, and have been an integral part of training law enforcement in science-based interviewing.1,2,3 In fact, the Boards is a method of hypothesis testing, the foundation of the scientific method.

The Boards within your organization

At the beginning of any decision to interview a subject, there is some level of pressure on the interviewer, and some level of uncertainty about how the process will play out. The pressure and/or uncertainty comes from many sources – the organizational hierarchies within a unit or agency, the media, family or friends of the subject, and one’s own colleagues. The number of people and entities impacted may increase as these individuals and entities become aware of the investigation or intelligence collection, thus increasing the pressure. Confusion may arise from the various entities involved in the investigation process and uncertainties about the roles each should play. The Boards is a way of de