Mr. Big is a technique mostly used in Canada, and it consists of the police creating a fake criminal organization to seduce the suspect into joining it. They pretend to have a casual encounter and start building rapport with him, eventually leading to a highly paid job offer for small criminal activities such as delivering light drugs. These tasks grow in importance and frequency, and he's treated as an up-and-comer in the organization. The suspect is eventually led to Mr. Big, the fake criminal organization's kingpin, who is actually a highly skilled undercover interrogator. Using threats, Mr. Big tells the suspect that he received incriminating information about him from the police and that his arrest could threaten the gang. He then offers the suspect to clear up his situation, but to do that, he needs to know what the suspect actually did, which makes him confess. The final meeting is obviously recorded, and when the confession is done, the whole fake criminal organization reveals itself as the police, and he gets arrested. This technique is usually used as a last resort as it could sometimes cause false

confessions out of fear for Mr. Big, or to keep the lavish lifestyle that the fake criminal organization has offered him. Good cop and bad cop, also called the mut and Jeff technique, consists of two people taking two opposite approaches to the interrogated person. One interrogator adopts a hostile approach, emphasizing threats of punishment, while the other one adopts a more sympathetic one, emphasizing reward, in order to convince the interrogated person to cooperate. The good cop then starts defending the subject from the bad cop's threats and accusations. This makes the subject feel like he can cooperate with the good cop either out of trust or out of fear of the bad one. This technique, however, has two disadvantages: it can be easily spotted, and the bad cop could alienate the subject. The Reid technique consists of a three-phase process. The interviewer starts with a fact analysis, then goes into a behavior analysis, and after that, if appropriate, the interviewer goes on with Reid's nine steps of interrogation. It is appropriate to go on with the nine steps only if the

first two phases show information that indicates that the subject is involved in the commission of the crime. The interrogation is an accusatory process, different from the usual question-and-answer format, being kind of a monologue made by the interviewer that tells the subject that the results of investigations clearly show he's guilty. In the whole interrogation process, the interviewer keeps a calm and understanding demeanor with the goal of making the subject gradually more comfortable with telling the truth. This specific part is done by the investigator who offers various psychological reasons that justify the subject's behavior. First of all, the interviewer lets the suspect know that investigations lead to him as a potential suspect and asks him why the offense took place, giving him an early opportunity to confess. Then, the interviewer tries to shift the blame from the suspect to some other person or set of circumstances that made the suspect commit the crime, psychologically justifying his actions. While he does all of this, the interviewer tries to minimize the suspect's denials until the

suspect gives a reason for why he did or didn't commit the crime, which the interviewer uses to move towards the acknowledgement of what the suspect did. He then uses body language techniques like eye contact or proximity to assure that the suspect is receptive and when he's listening. The interviewer once again psychologically justifies his actions. If the suspect cries at this point, the interviewer can deduce that he might be feeling guilty for committing the crime. After that, the interviewer poses what's called the alternative question, which consists of giving two choices for what happened, one more socially acceptable than the other. At this point, the suspect is expected to choose one of them, usually the most socially acceptable one. But whichever he chooses, he's admitting his guilt. If he admits it, the interviewer leads the suspect to repeat the admission of guilt in front of witnesses and starts testing the validity of the confession. Lastly, the interviewer documents the suspect's admission or confession. Minimization and maximization, these are two variations of the same tactic.

minimization. The interviewer makes the crime look smaller than it truly is, making the suspect more inclined to confess as he starts thinking that he might get a smaller punishment than he originally thought. In maximization, the interviewer makes the crime look bigger than it is and starts stating the most severe punishments applicable to the offense, making the suspect believe he'll get a smaller sentence if he confesses. This one is also a pretty controversial technique and it could lead to false confessions. Informal questioning: Sometimes police officers prefer to do field interviews without arresting people so they don't have to read Miranda rights. This masks an actual interview with a normal and informal conversation while the officer might actually be obtaining important information from the suspect. Another technique similar to this one is the change of scenery technique, which consists in the interviewer and suspect moving away from the formal environment where the actual interview happened and in the interviewer asking questions in an informal way to the suspect. This makes him feel like he left the interrogation behind and he never

notices that he's still being questioned. The pause technique. After the suspect answers a question, the interviewer remains silent and maintains eye contact. This makes the suspect feel like he has to share more information, and the more he does, the better the chance he contradicts either himself or any known fact obtained through evidence. Peace technique. The peace technique is a five-stage process that was created after the realization that psychologically coercive techniques often led to false confessions. It's more of a dialogue between the interviewer and the suspect, where the latter is let free to give their version of what happened uninterruptedly before presenting him with any evidence of inconsistencies or contradictions. Its goal is to obtain a full account of events rather than just seeking a confession. The first of the five stages is planning and preparation, which requires investigators to find out as much as they can about the incident under investigation, including who needs to be interviewed and why. The second stage is called engage and explain, and in this one, the interviewer tries to

build rapport with the suspect. It's done by asking the suspect how they'd like to be addressed, how much time they have for the interview, or by giving him reassurance if he seems anxious. The third stage, called account clarification and challenge, is the one where the interviewer tries to obtain a full account of events from the subject without interrupting. Once the subject has explained what happened, the interviewer can ask follow-up questions and eventually, in cases of contradictory information, even challenge the suspect's story. The fourth stage is called closure, and it involves summarizing what the suspect has said to ensure that there's a mutual understanding between both parties. It also involves verifying that everything that needs to be discussed has been covered. The last stage is called evaluation, and it requires the interviewer to examine if they got what they wanted from the interview, how the investigation has changed with the new information, and what could have been done better in the interview itself. As the name says, this technique is much more peaceful and focuses on building rapport with the

suspect to encourage cooperation. Rapid fire one or more interrogators start asking rapid-fire questions in such a manner that the suspect does not have time to answer a question completely before the next one is asked. This confuses him and makes him contradict himself as he has little time to formulate his answers. The interrogators then proceed to question him about those contradictions. 

Pride and ego down. This one consists of attacking the suspect's sense of personal worth, which could lead to an attempt to redeem his pride by cooperating. This technique is most effective when used against suspects who have shown emotional weakness or feelings of inferiority, but it's also pretty risky as if it fails, the interviewer has a much harder time switching to another approach without losing his credibility. 

Repetition. To make the suspect give a full and candid answer, the interrogator keeps asking the same questions and repeating the suspect's answers so that he gets so bored that he gives a full answer in an attempt to avoid further questions by the interrogator. 

Loaded questions. Loaded

questions implicitly assume that certain facts are true. If used with psychologically exhausted suspects, this technique could produce both unintentional slip-ups that reveal the truth, or completely false confessions. Establish your identity. The suspect is told that some higher authorities have identified him as a dangerous criminal with really serious charges. So, in an attempt to correct this mistake against the interrogator, perpetual denials, he provides true statements about what actually happened. Shout out to these guys who support my channel through Patreon. You can end up on this list as well. Check out the link in the description.

Every Interrogation Technique Explained in 8 Minutes

I explain interesting stuff using paint.

💼 Business Mail: operamp4@gmail.com


Every Interrogation Technique Explained in 8 Minutes

Every Interrogation Technique Explained in 8 Minutes

스크립트