
There are three
interviewing techniques that could be applied in order to minimise problems as
mentioned:
1. REID – a guided model
on lying detection and psychological persuasion (Rollnick & Miller 1995);
2. PEACE – Provides a framework for interviewing
witnesses; essentially providing a ‘conversation management’ approach and
locating the witnesses’ inconsistencies; and
3. Motivational
Interview - “A directive, client-centred counselling style for eliciting
behavioural change by helping clients to explore and resolve ambivalence”.
Additionally, there are
court rules that disallows how questions are framed when questioning witnesses
for example, closed questions. The court disallows interviewers or
interrogators to guide the witness to answers where they could potentially hurt
their credibility.
Much evidence has
suggested that a humanitarian approach is more likely to result in a
confession. Thus, this should be an alternative approach as this could first,
limit the confusion of interrogation and interviewing. Moreover, this could
also assist the court to determine whether the confession was orchestrated by
duress.
In my working experience
at a law firm, we usually encourage our clients to tell us everything about
their legal dispute matter whether it prejudices them or not. Although they may
be disadvantaged, this allows us to provide support on that issue and encourage
the court to disregard it.
Reference
Davies, G. L. (2002). The Exclusion of Evidence
Illegally or Improperly Obtained: An Unsatisfactory Answer to an Unstated
Question. Journal of
Financial Crime, 9, 224 – 248. doi: 10.1108/eb026023
Rollnick, S., & Miller, R.W. (1995. What is MI?
Retrieved from http://www.motivationalinterview.net/clinical/whatismi.html
No comments:
Post a Comment