Interrogations-and-Confessions-Handbook

24 A Psychology of Interrogations and Confessions
feeding suspects with pertinent case details) are difficult to prove or disprove.
McConville (1992) gives an excellent illustration of two such cases.
The ultimate confession statement may look very convincing when taken out
of context. It is typically highly prejudicial against the defendant and without
the complete picture of how it came about the court may place too much weight
on it. In other words, such statements have the potential of being seriously
misleading to the court.
Another potential problem with electronic recording is that if police officers
are no longer able to place suspects under pressure during tape-recorded interviews
they may shift the pressure outside the formal interview. This may
happen by officers informally interviewing suspects prior to their arriving at
the police station (Heaton-Armstrong, 1987; Wolchover & Heaton-Armstrong,
1991), or in the police cell prior to or between interviews (Dixon, Bottomley,
Cole, Gill & Wall, 1990).
Moston and Stephenson (1993) found evidence that in England interviews
are commonly conducted prior to the formal interview, and this practice significantly
influenced whether or not the suspect subsequently made a confession
during the audio- or video-recorded interview. This demonstrates the great impact
that pre-interview conversations can have on the likelihood that the suspect
will subsequently confess. No doubt, many police officers will view this as
a positive and legitimate way of ‘getting to the truth’ and will be tempted to
resort to such behaviour in spite of the fact that they are in breach of their codes
of practice. The problem is that without a proper record of these conversations
or informal interviews there is no way of determining the tactics used by the
police and how they may have influenced the voluntariness and reliability of
the subsequent confession. In most instances no record is kept of these informal
interviews, and when a record is kept it is typically unsatisfactory. Moston and
Stephenson (1993) conclude:
Encounters outside the police station are important for understanding why suspects
make admissions inside the police station. Interviews inside the police station,
either recorded or audio or video taped, contain only one part of the relevant
exchanges between the suspect and police workers. The current legislation, by
emphasising the importance of interviews inside the police station has resulted in
a situation in which evidence gathered outside the station is seemingly of minimal
value. It is widely assumed that the use of tape or video recording equipment
inside the station gives a complete picture of the interview with a suspect. This
assumption appears to be incorrect. The statements made by suspects on tape are
the outcome of a series of conversations with police officers. The interview inside
the police station is merely the final part of this process (p. 47).
THE CONTEXT OF THE INTERROGATION
The context in which the interrogation takes place and the conditions of detention
can vary immensely. In some cases suspects are detained in custody, even
incommunicado, for days. They may be physically exhausted, emotionally distraught
and mentally confused when interrogated. With improved legal provisions
in England and Wales stipulated in the Police and Criminal Evidence Act