Order Interview And Interogation Discussion

January 3, 2023

Order Interview And Interogation Discussion

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

Order Interview And Interogation Discussion

INTRODUCTION

Law enforcement can only receive so much information from the crime scene itself and any surveillance measures. Thus, a case is built also on in-depth conversations with witnesses, friends, family, and suspects. Criminal justice professionals must be adept at extracting information from those involved in a crime while also abiding by legal standards.

You may be familiar with the interrogation strategy of “good cop, bad cop” and the use of deceptive tactics (e.g., “Your buddy in the next room is telling us a different story”) from police procedurals you have seen on TV. In reality, interrogations require a plan, a wide range of skills, and the ability to assess and match a suspect’s demeanor—and are much more nuanced than what is shown in a 1-hour fictional program.

This week, you explore the skills and laws associated with interviews and interrogations while also evaluating how certain characteristics affect the interrogator and the suspect.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

Students will:

Differentiate between an interview and an interrogation

Analyze legal requirements when conducting an interview or interrogation

Evaluate the intended effects of interrogation characteristics on the interrogator and suspect

dentify terminology related to crime scene evidence, surveillance, and interview and interrogation

INTERVIEW OR INTERROGATION?

While an interview and an interrogation may seem like two distinct and separate activities, the line between them can be blurry at times due to the nature of police work and interactions with suspects. One can bleed into the other.

Consider the following scenario:

An individual is arrested on suspicion of identity theft. The arresting officer reads the suspect her Miranda rights, and she requests a lawyer and invokes silence. However, while being transported to jail, the suspect mutters while staring out the window, “I never really looked like that chick anyway.” The statement then leads to a confession.

In this Discussion, you analyze circumstances where an interview may become an interrogation and the actions and laws associated with that transition.

Post a response to the following:

Explain when an interview becomes an interrogation and how the interviewer/interrogator would proceed differently based on this transition.

In reference to the scenario described above, can a suspect “un-invoke” Miranda? Can a conversation that is not an interrogation (excited utterance) lead to a confession?

Order Interview And Interogation Discussion

Required Readings

Brandl, S. (2018). Criminal investigation (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Chapter 6, “Interviews and Eyewitness Identifications Download Interviews and Eyewitness Identifications” (pp. 142–177)

Brandl, S. (2018). Criminal investigation (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Chapter 7, “Interrogations and Confessions Download Interrogations and Confessions” (pp. 178–211)

Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). 18 U.S. Code § 3501. Admissibility of confessions Links to an external site.. Retrieved March 30, 2019, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3501

Taylor, B. (2015). You have the right to be confused! Understanding Miranda after 50 years Links to an external site.. Pace Law Review, 36(1), 158–214.

Cicchini, M. D. (2012). The new Miranda warning Links to an external site.. SMU Law Review, 65(4), 911–941.

[Order Now]

Order Interview And Interogation Discussion

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.