Educing Information: Interrogation - National Intelligence University

legal advice. 349 Though not directly related to the access to, or presence of, legal
counsel during an interrogation, Leo’s findings regarding suspects’ likelihood
of invoking their Miranda rights are illuminating, because this action usually
leads to access to an attorney and the automatic termination of interrogation.
Even though invoking Miranda is a potentially powerful tool for suspects to
avoid interrogation and, thus, confession or self-incrimination, Leo found that
78.29% of his sample chose to waive their Miranda rights, while 21.71% chose
to terminate questioning. 350
2. Strength of the Evidence: The Moston, Stephenson and Williamson study
provides the strongest support for the theory that the strength of the evidence against
a suspect is the best predictor of the likelihood of a confession. 351 Confessions
were rare (less than 10% of cases) and denials common (77% of cases) when the
evidence against the suspect was weak. 352 On the other hand, when the evidence
was strong confessions were common (67% of cases) and denials infrequent
(16% of cases). 353 However, Leo’s findings do not corroborate the theory that the
strength of the evidence prior to questioning “exert[s] a statistically significant
effect on the likelihood that the suspect will provide incriminating information
during interrogation.” 354
3. Interrogation Techniques: Evidence shows that the more serious the offense,
the more police use persuasive techniques to break down resistance. 355 In his
study of 156 videotaped interrogations, Gudjonsson found open-ended questions
in 98% of the interviews, and leading questions in 73% of the sample. 356 The most
common techniques of persuasion were the introduction of allegations against the
suspect, seen in 74% of the cases, and challenges to a lie or an inconsistency, seen
in 20% of the interviews. 357 Other types of challenges, emphasis on the seriousness
of the offense, and psychological manipulation were individually noted in less
than 8% of the cases. 358 Ultimately, 53% of the suspects in Gudjonsson’s study
made a full confession or a self-incriminating admission (i.e., an admission of
involvement in the offense, but minimizing intent or role). 359 In 97% of cases the
confession or admission occurred in the first interview. 360
349
Moston, see note 195.
350
Leo, see note 110, p. 276.
351
Gudjonsson, see note 110, p. 150. See also M.L. Wald et al., “Interrogations in New Haven:
The impact of Miranda,” Yale Law Journal 76, no. 1519 (1967) (finding that suspects were
significantly more likely to provide incriminating information during interrogation the stronger the
evidence against them prior to questioning).
352
Moston, see note 195.
353
Id.
354
Leo, see note 110, p. 292.
355
See Evans, note 345; B. Irving and I.K. McKenzie Police Interrogation: The Effects of the
Police and Criminal Evidence Act (London: The Police Foundation, 1989).
356
Gudjonsson, see note 110, p. 69.
357
Id.
358
Id.
359
Id., p. 70.
360
Id.
171