Search results

The aim of this paper is to review common methods used by English lawyers when questioning police witnesses, and to identify training issues for preparing officers for giving evidence in court.

A questionnaire was administered to 48 police detectives concerning the last time they gave evidence in court, the types of questions they were asked during cross‐examination, lawyers' tactics, and what they believed to be personal attacks.

The findings indicated that detectives perceived they were questioned in a consistent manner, and asked questions that they felt at times were difficult to understand, difficult to answer, upsetting, and distorted their evidence. Nevertheless, they were generally satisfied with their experiences in court.

The current study in this paper uses self‐report methodology that may be less objective than independent observation. A potentially fruitful avenue of research might be the study of court cases where police officers give evidence to measure the influence of lawyers' questions directly.

The results indicate a number of training issues for preparing police officers to give evidence in court. Officers should be trained to deal with confusing or constraining questioning, and to thoroughly prepare. Officers should also be trained concerning how to deal with inconsistencies in evidence, mistakes, and having their character attacked.

This is the first survey, to the authors' knowledge, of police officers' experiences of giving evidence in court and suggests some ways of improving the overall accuracy of police witnesses' accounts in court.

Legislation in many developed nations allows for the video‐recorded interview of a witness made during the investigation to be used as his or her evidence‐in‐chief at trial. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the challenges for the criminal justice system of trying to make one interview meet both investigative and evidential purposes.

Advances in effective police interviewing strategies are outlined and evaluated with regards the implications of presenting evidence elicited in this manner in court.

As with any significant change, the move towards this method of evidence presents challenges. However, using this video record as evidence will ensure that the best evidence is preserved and the jury has access to a transparent record that is more accurate and complete than previously experienced.

The paper acknowledges that concerns over any extra time taken by using video recording must be taken into account, but also balanced against the likely long‐term benefits, not only in fairness to the proceedings but also by easing the process for victims and witnesses.

The purpose of this paper is to determine the role of evidence in the interviewing of suspects.

Analyses were made of 55 interview transcripts about the questioning of suspected sex offenders by officers of an Australian police service.

In 22 per cent of these interviews the suspect actively attempted to discover what the evidence against them was and in 9 per cent the interviewer attempted to learn of the suspect's knowledge of this evidence. Interviewers tended to favour a strategy of first asking the suspect to provide a free account of their role in the alleged crime. If this approach failed to elicit a confession, interviewers would then disclose at least some of the evidence against that suspect. In 93 per cent of the interviews some form of evidence disclosure was made by the interviewer; this was usually achieved by referring to the evidence indirectly rather than explicitly.

Although such disclosures of information seemed to have little impact on suspects' decisions to confess, this study illustrates the important role of evidence in the suspect interviewing process.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss two distinct but interrelated areas, namely witness/victim and suspect interviewing, and to argue that both must continue to evolve, suggest how they might do so, and that this process must be driven by emergent theory and contemporary empirical research.

The paper outlines the impact of psychological theory and empirical research to investigative interviewing in recent decades.

It is argued that in order to stay ahead of the game, the field of investigative interviewing (suspect and witness) must continue to evolve in such a manner that not only protects and fosters the important practitioner/academic relationship, but also ensures that future directions are driven by empirical research, with recourse to emergent theory.

The paper outlines the impact of psychological theory and empirical research on investigative interviewing and the consequent enhancement of the interviewing of both suspected offenders and witnesses. The paper demonstrates that working closely together academic research can make a difference, and influence law, policy decisions and training guidelines in order to improve practice.

In a Report, issued on July 9, 1896, the Select Committee on Food Products Adulteration recommended the establishment of a central government scientific authority, who should act as a court of reference upon scientific questions arising under the Adulteration Acts, and who should be empowered, at their discretion, to prescribe standards and limits as to the quality and purity of food. It was rightly held by the Select Committee that the constitution of such an authority is an absolute necessity in order that the all‐important question of food standards may be duly considered and dealt with, and that all matters affecting the administration of the Acts and involving scientific considerations may be placed on a more satisfactory footing. The Committee also expressed the opinion that the formation of such an authority would result in the removal of many practical difficulties met with in the administration of the Acts, and would largely obviate the costly litigation in which public bodies, traders, and others are constantly liable to be involved under existing conditions. Nothing whatever has been done to give effect to the recommendation of the Committee in spite of the fact that the necessity for some such course of action as that indicated has been demonstrated beyond possibility of question, and that further evidence proving the wisdom of the Committee's suggestion is constantly afforded. The Islington brandy case provides the latest illustration of the extremely unsatisfactory conditions under which public bodies are required to administer the Acts and under which traders have to answer charges made against them. A local grocer was summoned by the Islington Borough Council for selling, as brandy, a liquid which was certified by the Public Analyst to contain 60 per cent. of spirit not derived from the grape, and which was therefore not of the nature, substance and quality of the article demanded. The vendor naturally referred the matter to the firm who had supplied him. The case was taken up by a traders' association, and, after five lengthy hearings, in the course of which much expert evidence was given on both sides, resulted in a conviction and the infliction of a penalty of £5 and £50 costs—an amount which probably represents only a fraction of the expense involved. For the present we do not propose to review the scientific evidence which was put forward by the prosecution and by the defence. There is no doubt that Mr. FORDHAM, the magistrate who heard the case, was perfectly right in taking the view that the term “brandy,” when unqualified, means a spirit distilled from wine or from fermented products of the grape. It is also perfectly plain that when a person asks for brandy and is supplied with coloured grain spirit, or with a mixture of grain spirit and true brandy, he is prejudiced, and that the vendor commits an offence under the Acts. The fact that the term “brandy” has been commonly applied to “silent spirit” coloured and flavoured to imitate true brandy, or to mixtures of brandy and alcohol derived from other sources than the produce of the grape, is not a legitimate excuse for the sale of such factitious articles as “brandy.” The great difficulty lies in differentiating by analytical means between the genuine article and the imitation. The vast majority of people, being utterly ignorant even of the elements of chemistry, labour under the impression that all that need be done in a matter of this kind is to tell the Public Analyst to “analyse,” and that full, exact, and absolutely definite information which nobody can call in question, will be forthcoming as a matter of course. The evidence given in the case under consideration is quite enough in itself to show the absurdity of this assumption. On the one hand the Public Analyst stated that he was satisfied, from the results of his general investigations in regard to brandy and from the results of his analysis of the sample submitted to him, that this sample contained 60 per cent. of spirit other than that derived from the produce of the grape. On the other hand, a number of analytical experts called for the defence asserted that in the present state of analytical knowledge it was perfectly impossible for any Public Analyst to arrive at the conclusion mentioned in regard to the sample in question, and that, as a fact, the analytical evidence adduced did not justify the statement made in the certificate on which the proceedings were founded. The defence do not appear to have denied that the Public Analyst might be right. In reality it appears only to have been contended that his analytical evidence was not, sufficient to prove that he was so. At any rate the experts called for the defence certainly did not prove by scientific evidence that he was wrong.

The purpose of this paper is to present an argument for the use of cognitive interviews to be use in financial crime investigations. In particular, the paper argues that the components of cognitive interview make it useful for financial crime investigators to gather and collate information on financial criminality.

The paper chronicles the literature on cognitive interviews to critically evaluate its usefulness in previous studies.

A critical examination of the literature shows that cognitive interviews were successfully used in a variety of circumstances. Despite its difficulties, the empirical evidence reveals that cognitive interview fared well in laboratory studies across different (and vulnerable) population groups.

There is evidence to suggest that cognitive interviews can be an effective technique to interview witnesses of financial crimes. The fact that white-collar criminals, more often than not, comes from a “gentleman background” and are not accustomed to the role of “criminal suspect,” makes cognitive interview techniques a useful tool for fraud investigators.

To the author’s knowledge, this is the first paper of its kind to conduct a thorough literature review and apply cognitive interview techniques to financial crime investigation.

Attention was called in the March number of this Journal to the promotion of a Bill for the reconstitution of the Local Government Board, and the opinion was expressed that the renovated Department should contain among its staff “experts of the first rank in all the branches of science from which the knowledge essential for efficient administration can be drawn.”