Tactical interrogation techniques in modern crime investigation practice

Zainullin Ruslan Il'darovich ORCID: 0000-0001-8571-5555 Doctor of Law Professor, Department of Criminalistics, Ufa University of Science and Technology 450005, Russia, Republic of Bashkortostan, Ufa, Dostoevsky str., 131 zaynullin083@yandex.ru

The basis of the investigator's search and cognitive activity is the use of effective means of cognition of the criminal event that occurred. One of these means is interrogation. Interrogation is the only investigative action, without the production of which no investigation is complete.

It is the interrogation that takes up most of the investigator's working time when investigating crimes. In this regard, of course, the level of efficiency of interrogation is of interest, which can be achieved only with the competent use of tactical techniques.

In the forensic literature, the issues of the use of tactical techniques during interrogation are widely covered. At the same time, it is of some interest which of them have passed the test of time and have received general recognition both in the scientific community and in practice. To achieve this goal, we not only analyzed and summarized the data of domestic criminologists and the results of foreign studies, but also conducted an anonymous survey of investigators in the Republic of Bashkortostan and the Republic of Tatarstan (53 investigators were interviewed in total, 20 of whom have more than five years of experience). As a result, we have identified the following basic interrogation tactics that have received general recognition and have passed the test of time.

Discussion. The tactic "conversation" is a confidential conversation on abstract topics between the investigator and the interrogated person, preceding the stage of detailed research. The objective characteristic of this tactic is, firstly, to establish psychological contact with the interrogated person, and secondly, to analyze and test the behavioral characteristics of the person in a calm atmosphere during a conversation. As Professor L.V. Bertovsky correctly points out: "So, if a person stutters during an interrogation, and spoke normally during a quiet conversation, we can conclude that he is very nervous" ^{[1, p. 108]}. Also, when using this tactic, the investigator neutralizes, for example, the nervous state of the interrogated person, his excessive uncertainty and hesitation, if they are noticeable at the beginning of the interrogation, when the conversation has not yet touched on the circumstances being clarified and the subject of proof. During the conversation, by asking questions about certain circumstances about which the investigator has full information, he can thus diagnose the behavioral and psychological characteristics of a person in cases of giving deliberately false information. The considered tactical technique can be used both in a conflict-free and in a conflict-free investigative situation.

According to the results of the survey, the following pattern was revealed: regardless of the length of investigative work, the considered tactical technique is used by 87% of all interrogated investigators on a permanent basis.

Contrast method.  In order to establish psychological contact and the location of the interrogated person to constructive information interaction, in cases of the need to relieve a state of tension, excessive nervousness, the investigator can demonstrate the existence of even worse situations developing for the interrogated persons that he met in his investigative practice. Such a comparison of the situation of the interrogated person and possible worse situations can have a beneficial effect on him, creating a calm and trusting atmosphere during the interrogation. The effect of using such a tactical technique based on the achievements of psychology is vividly illustrated in the scientific literature ^{[2, pp. 27-32]}. Such a tactic can be used in any investigative situation.

During the survey, we received the following data: 37.5% of investigators with more than five years of experience and 23.7% of investigators with less than five years of experience use this tactic on a regular basis.

The division of the themes of a free story. The essence of the tactical technique is to determine by the investigator a certain order of the free story of the interrogated person. This tactic is appropriate, for example, when investigating multi-episode crimes. In the literature, there is also the possibility of its use to prevent the giving of deliberately false information. ^{[3, 4, 5, 6]}. When the topics of a free story are defined in such a sequence in which the interrogated person, having first given truthful testimony under certain circumstances, is forced to give truthful testimony also under circumstances that he initially wanted to conceal or in relation to which he was preparing to give false testimony. Such a psychological pattern is explained by the fact that the interrogated person will not want to contradict himself, having first given truthful testimony.

According to the results of the study, it was found that 14.3% of investigators with more than five years of experience and 3.7% of investigators with less than five years of experience use this tactic on an ongoing basis.

The method of cognitive interviewing (remembering the forgotten). The considered tactical technique is based on the achievements of modern cognitive psychology and is used in cases when the interrogated person sincerely, for various reasons, experiences difficulties with remembering the criminal event that occurred. The method itself is based on several principles: a) presentation of information about the event in reverse chronological order; b) presentation of information about the event from the point of view of other participants; c) presentation of information about the criminal event in terms of cognitive representation (mental image of the event); d) presentation of information with an emphasis on any details of what happened events, including those that are not relevant to the investigation of a criminal case, but nevertheless, helping the interrogated person to remember the forgotten, based on the associative nature of thinking and memory. The use of this tactic is limited to conflict-free investigative situations when there are no grounds to believe that the interrogated person intentionally distorts or withholds criminally significant information. In general, the effectiveness of the method has been scientifically proven, although some researchers note the need for further improvement of it ^{[7, pp. 340-372]}.

The survey results showed that only 4.3% of investigators with more than five years of experience and 1.7% of investigators with less than five years of experience use this tactic on a regular basis.

Assistance in the verbalization of testimony. When reproducing memories, a large proportion of criminally significant information is often lost. Such a loss of information is due to many reasons. This is the insufficiency of speech constructions to describe the properties and signs of individual phenomena, objects and other objects that are elements of the criminal event that took place, these are memory errors widely described in psychology, and many other reasons. A striking example of the limited possibilities of verbalization of information stored in the memory of the interrogated person is the receipt of indications about the color of objects or objects. According to the science of coloristics, the existing colors and their shades are estimated at approximately more than 150,000. Naturally, the speech apparatus of modern man is not able to describe them all. In this regard, to facilitate the verbalization of color information by the investigator, modern forensic color determinants or universal reference books, including specialized software, can be successfully used. In addition, when describing the criminal event that occurred, the investigator is recommended to suggest to the interrogated person to sketch diagrams, drawings or simply draw objects, when describing which a person experiences certain difficulties.

We got an unexpected result when we interviewed about the frequency of use of the tactical interrogation technique in question. Thus, only 2% of the interrogated investigators, regardless of the length of investigative work, use this tactic in their investigative work. At the same time, the frequency of use was indicated as "extremely rare".

The direct question method. The essence of the tactical technique is that the interrogated person is likely to truthfully answer the question that is asked directly to them. The effectiveness of this tactic lies in the successful combination of the surprise factor and a monosyllabic question that does not involve answer options.

The survey of investigators showed a rather large prevalence of this tactical technique. So, regardless of the length of investigative work, the considered tactical technique is used by 67% of all interrogated investigators on a permanent basis.

Exaggeration of the investigator's awareness. In foreign literature it is known as "We know all" ^[8]. This tactical technique is based on the creation by the investigator of the interrogated person of an erroneous impression of a high degree of his awareness of the circumstances of the criminal event that occurred. Such an erroneous impression is formed due to the effect obtained from the formation of the first part of the subject of interrogation in such a way that questions are put to the interrogated according to circumstances in respect of which the investigator has general and detailed information obtained from other sources. In this regard, the use of such a technique is possible only if the investigator already has a certain array of criminally significant information. Despite its effectiveness, nevertheless, the tactic under consideration raises doubts from the point of view of morality. The fine line between investigative cunning and deception causes high demands on the investigator both in terms of professionalism and in the field of his decency.

The considered tactical technique turned out to be the most common in the investigative practice of interrogation along with the "conversation" tactical technique. Thus, 83.7% of all interrogated investigators, regardless of their work experience, use this tactic in their daily practice of conducting interrogations.

Reality monitoring. The presented tactical technique is used in cases where it is necessary to diagnose perception errors and differentiate between real memories of an event and false memories formed as a result of errors in perception or intentionally. The essence of the reality monitoring method is to analyze and evaluate these indications according to specially developed criteria: the clarity of the testimony; the presence of information received from the senses in the testimony; the presence of cognitive operations; the effect of affect; the presence of temporal and spatial information; the degree of realism of the testimony; the degree of the ability to reconstruct the event according to the testimony ^{[9, p. 64-102]}.

Monitoring of reality showed good results of the conducted research. Thus, 37.4% of interrogated investigators with more than five years of experience and 33.1% of interrogated investigators with less than five years of experience use this tactic on a regular basis.

Replacement of motivations. As already proved by psychologists, the deception is based on the purposeful nature of actions caused by psychological conditions, that is, the motive ^{[10, p. 10-25]}. Among the motives for giving deliberately false testimony, one can distinguish the fear of criminal punishment of the interrogated person, fear for his life and health, the life and health of his close relatives, self-interest, expressed, for example, in unwillingness to disclose the whereabouts of the abducted, religious motives, etc. The main focus of the investigator's work is the disclosure of these motives and the awakening of positive motives for giving truthful testimony. This is achieved in different ways and using different recommendations. One of the most common methods is the method of persuasion (argumentation), determination of positive prospects, etc.

Disappointing results of the frequency of use were obtained during the survey of investigators. Thus, all the interrogated investigators indicated that they had never used the tactic in question in their investigative practice.

The method of question bombing. The essence of the tactical technique is to repeatedly pose the same questions at random intervals, but differently formulated. Such repetition sometimes breaks liars, because the brain of the interrogated person must constantly struggle with such a "bombardment" and maintain an ideal model of false testimony that exists in parallel with truthful information, which undoubtedly requires considerable intellectual effort.

According to the results of an anonymous survey of investigators, we found that only half of the investigators, regardless of their work experience, use the tactic in question on a regular basis, the remaining half use it extremely rarely.

Assumption of the legend. One of the well-proven tactics is to conduct a series of interrogations in order to consolidate as much as possible contradictions in the testimony of the interrogated person who gives deliberately false testimony. The effectiveness of the reception is due to the peculiarities of human memory. Thus, a liar is forced to store in memory two information models that contradict each other. Naturally, this requires considerable mental effort, especially if one of these models has to be repeated repeatedly through its verbalization after a certain time. As a rule, the lying participant of the interrogation begins over time to allow pronouncements, internal inaccuracies and contradictions in his testimony. At the same time, the investigator should not focus on them, since his main task in such cases will be to record them in the interrogation protocols and collect evidence from other sources that strengthen the evidence of the falsity of testimony. This tactic is impractical only in the absence of a sufficient evidence base, which makes it possible to draw an unambiguous conclusion about the involvement of the interrogated person in the criminal event that occurred.

The tactical technique of "assuming a legend" is used by 24% of investigators with less than five years of experience in a permanent job. For investigators with more than five years of experience, this figure was 36%.

Suppression of lies. This tactic is a kind of antagonist to the above method of assuming a legend. In the case under consideration, the investigator, at the moment of detecting a contradiction in the testimony of the interrogated person, on the contrary, immediately focuses his attention on the falsity of the information presented. The use of methods of presenting evidence enhances the effect of this tactical technique. The suddenness of the suppression of lies may prompt the interrogated person to abandon the position of giving deliberately false testimony.

On an ongoing basis, the considered tactical technique is used by only 23.7% of investigators, regardless of work experience.

Presentation of evidence. This tactical technique belongs to the group of logical influence techniques. It consists in presenting evidence in the case, illustrating the evidence of the falsity of these testimonies. This tactic is effective when interrogating persons with a sufficient level of intellectual development, allowing him to draw appropriate conclusions about the uselessness of the position taken in a criminal case. There are many ways to use the presentation of evidence: from the least weighty to the most weighty evidence, simultaneous presentation of evidence, alternate presentation of evidence, etc. The definition of a specific method of presenting evidence depends on the identity of the person being interrogated and the specific investigative situation.

We got good results of using this tactical technique as a result of generalization of interrogators' surveys. Thus, 47% of investigators with more than five years of work experience and 48.7% of investigators with less than five years of work experience use the method on a permanent basis.

We have tried to outline only the basic tactical techniques used in the modern practice of conducting interrogations. This list is not exhaustive. The considered tactical techniques should be used in various combinations, taking into account the personality of the interrogated and the investigative situation that developed at the time of the interrogation. Such consideration of recommendations increases their effectiveness and efficiency.

In the scientific forensic literature, there are other tactical techniques. Some of them cause us fair doubts about the possibility of their use and the sufficiency of scientific justification of their effectiveness, and some are obviously impossible due to their complexity and complexity.

The possibility of using such a tactical device as a "good-evil policeman" seems doubtful. Initially, the tactic in question was developed and applied in the practice of investigating foreign countries, primarily in the United States. The essence of the reception consists in the alternate interrogation of a person by two investigators. One investigator during the interrogation clearly demonstrates his dislike for the interrogated, including by interrupting the interrogated's free story, making value judgments about the interrogated's personality, etc. The second investigator, on the contrary, is tactful, friendly and attentive during interrogation. Such a contrast, according to the idea of law enforcement officers, should lead to the creation of a trusting atmosphere with the second investigator, and as a result, giving truthful testimony to the interrogated.

It seems that in our conditions the use of such a recommendation seems impossible for several reasons. Firstly, from a moral point of view, such behavior of an official representative of investigative bodies is impermissible, since it automatically levels the educational impact of the investigator and causes irreparable damage to the reputation of law enforcement agencies as a whole. Secondly, it is difficult to imagine conducting an interrogation by two interrogators at once, including based on the meaning of the current criminal procedure legislation strictly regulating the interrogation procedure.

         Some tactical techniques developed by the science of criminology also raise doubts about the possibility and expediency of their practical use. For example, in the literature there is a recommendation of the possibility of using odors in the investigator's office ^{[1, p. 90-91]}. The essence lies in the ability of individual smells to activate certain areas of the brain, thereby, for example, to relieve fatigue in a witness, or to excite the nervous system to activate the interrogation process, etc.

Without going into the essence of the scientific justification of such a recommendation, we just note that it is difficult for us to imagine an investigator placing scented candles in his office, preparing for the upcoming interrogation.  We believe that the effect of using such an "exotic" tactical technique is not obvious and requires additional scientific justification. With the same success, you can recommend a relaxing massage to a witness in order to relieve the tension of the investigative action, which, undoubtedly, can be proved by medical science. It seems that it is categorically impossible to simply use the achievements of other branches of science. Any research results, tools, methods formed by various sciences should be adapted to the field of criminal justice through reasoned and convincing scientific justification. Actually, this is one of the purposes of the science of criminology.

         Thus, the modern practice of interrogation has an impressive arsenal of tools for effective interrogation. At the same time, unfortunately, some issues of verification of the effectiveness of some of the recommendations and research results proposed by science remain unresolved today, as well as issues of their adaptation by the science of criminology in relation to the field of criminal proceedings.

         As a result of the conducted research, one more conclusion can be drawn. Only those tactical techniques, the use of which does not imply the need to master a complex methodology for their use, take root in practice. Thus, investigators at the district level practically do not use such effective tactics as cognitive interviewing and reality monitoring. Thus, the easier a tactical technique is to use, the higher the probability that practitioners will adopt it.