Interrogations-and-Confessions-Handbook

Interrogation in Britain 43
SOFTLEY’S STUDY
In 1979, a team from the Home Office Research Unit, at the request of the Royal
Commission on Criminal Procedure, conducted an observational study into police
questioning of suspects at four police stations in England (Softley, 1980).
The purpose of the study was to provide an objective account, with reference to
the general ‘run-of-the-mill’ cases, of what happens to suspects from the time of
their arrival at the police station and until they are put in a police cell after being
charged. This included a direct observation of the interrogation of suspects.
The study was modelled on a similar American study (Wald et al., 1967). The
four police areas selected were from West Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire, Avon
and Somerset, and the Metropolitan (London) Police.
Softley and his colleagues observed the interviews of 218 criminal suspects,
of which 187 were interviewed at a police station. Since it was impracticable
to observe all the cases at the police stations the researchers selected the more
serious offences, such as burglary, wounding or assault occasioning actual bodily
harm. Forty-eight per cent of the suspects interviewed at a police station made
a confession, and a further 13% made a damaging admission that fell short of
a full blown confession. Two suspects subsequently retracted their confession,
but they were nevertheless convicted. Only 12% of the 187 suspects exercised
their right to silence.
The observers noted persuasive interviewing tactics in about 60% of the
initial interviews. The most common tactic, reported in 22% of the interviews,
involved the police officer pointing to a contradiction or an inconsistency in
the suspect’s statement. In 13% of cases, the police told suspects firmly about
the overwhelming evidence against them. In a further 15% of cases the police
appeared to ‘bluff or hint that other evidence would be forthcoming’ (p. 79). In
about 6% of the initial interviews the police minimized the seriousness of the
offence or the suspect’s part in it. This tactic was commonly used in cases where
suspects were unduly ashamed of what they had done or that they appeared
to have exaggerated views about the severity of the likely sentence they would
receive. In about 7% of the initial interviews the police hinted that unless the
subjects cooperated they would be detained for a longer period at the police
station.
The researchers concluded that the interrogators were generally fair to the
suspect and rarely applied coercive tactics to obtain a confession. Unlike Irving
and McKenzie, the researchers in this study did not make a direct observation
of the mental state of the suspect. This is an important limitation.
WALSH’S STUDY
Walsh (1982) examined the arrest and interrogation practices under the emergency
legislation in Northern Ireland. The Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC)
had refused Walsh access to the records of interrogation so instead he interviewed
60 people who had been subjected to custodial interrogation by the
RUC between September 1980 and June 1981, in connection with suspected