Unit 6 Assignment 2: A Guide
For assignment 2, the scenario is that as part of your internship, you need to shadow investigators and
observe them carrying out investigative procedures and using different resources. You will also be required
to observe interviews with suspects and witnesses to learn different interviewing techniques. You are
required to demonstrate interview skills in a role-play before you are able to take part in an interview in a
real criminal investigation.
Grading Criteria
For distinction standard, learners must evaluate all
the stages of the investigation process. The
evaluation should include the impact of effectively
carrying out procedures compared to the impact of
when stages are not executed efficiently and
accurately. Learners should conclude the overall
impact this may have on the criminal investigation.
Learners should compare and contrast the
resources available during a criminal investigation,
including advantages and disadvantages of
resources used, giving examples where possible.
For merit standard, learners will discuss the
importance of each stage of a criminal investigation
and the resources available to secure a successful
conviction. Learners must compare the use of
different methods for interviewing in terms of the
suitability and importance during a criminal
investigation and they should give examples of
when different techniques may be used.
For pass standard, learners will explain all the
stages involved in an investigation and they should
describe how all the resources could be used during
an investigation. Learners should provide examples
of when these resources could be used. Learners
must take part in a mock interview where they will
plan their own interview questions based on a given
scenario or seen witness statement. They should
demonstrate interview skills and interview a
suspect or witness, recording their findings
What You Need To Do
The first step is that you need to write a report
where you:
1. Explain and evaluate the stages of an
investigation, from instigation to court. Evaluate
is where you are discussing the importance and
impact of getting each stage right or wrong;
2. Discuss the resources available at different
stages of the investigation, what they are, where
they come from, from types of information and
evidence they can provide and the strengths and
potential problems with that evidence;
3. Discuss the importance of each stage of the
investigation, setting out why it is important
(what could happen if each stage is successful
and what could happen if each stage were
unsuccessful) and of the resources that are
available to the investigator.
The reference criteria is detailed below:
What are the Stages of an investigation?
Irrespective as to how the investigation originates, in total, there are 7 stages of an investigation; all are
important and all feed into the next stage. Remember that you need to explain and evaluate the stages
of an investigation, from instigation to court. Evaluate is where you are discussing the importance and
impact of getting each stage right or wrong;
Stage 1: Instigating an Investigation
Investigations are started by a variety
of means, such as:
- Receiving a telephone report;
- A person reporting in person;
- Something
officers;
observed
by
police
- The result of other investigations; or
- The result of intelligence
When a report is received it is
important that all detailed are treated
in accordance with the CPIA 1996, and
that the information is recorded,
retained and subsequently revealed
to the investigating officer.
It is also important that as soon as information regarding a suspected offence is received, then that
must be treated as the start of the investigation process. It is therefore important that the person
seeing / receiving information obtains detailed information :







About where the incident is;
What happened;
When it happened;
Who did what;
To whom;
A detailed description of the offender;
All other relevant details (vehicles involved,
property stolen, etc.).
Remember:
“For distinction standard, learners must evaluate all the stages of the investigation process. The
evaluation should include the impact of effectively carrying out procedures compared to the impact of
when stages are not executed efficiently and accurately. Learners should conclude the overall impact
this may have on the criminal investigation. Learners should compare and contrast the resources
available during a criminal investigation, including advantages and disadvantages of resources used,
giving examples where possible.”
Obtaining detailed information is important because:
Consequence of Obtaining Detailed, Accurate
Consequence of Obtaining Inaccurate
Information
Information
You are able to determine whether an offence It is unclear as to whether an offence has been
has been committed – if no offence, no need for committed, and this can result wasted resources
an investigation.
through sending an investigator (unnecessarily)
to a non-criminal incident.
You are able to determine whether if it is an It is unclear as to whether it is a matter for your
offence that to be dealt with by your organisation organisation or not, and again, this can result
or another (e.g. the DWP, Trading Standards, etc. wasted resources through sending an
investigator (unnecessarily) to an incident that
should be investigated by another agency.
You can direct appropriate resources to the The investigation can be delayed whilst the
incident, e.g. several police officers to a report of investigator calls for appropriate resources, e.g.
a fight.
additional officers to conduct door-to-door
searches.
You can direct specialist services to the incident The investigation can also be delayed if vital
(e.g. Scenes of Crime Officers, armed response specialist services are not called initially, e.g. not
units, etc.).
calling a dog unit can delay the investigation, if
not completely ruin it.
You are more likely to respond quickly and Incomplete and/or inaccurate information can
accurately, e.g. sending investigators to the sent investigators to the wrong location, which
correct location.
can allow perpetrators to escape or even lose or
reduce the value of evidence.
It helps the officer investigating the offender Can result in the investigating officer making
make an informed decision on an initial course of incorrect decisions, which can delay the
action to take.
investigation.
Helps to prioritise the response.
Can incorrectly prioritise, or not prioritise an
investigation, which could delay it.
Helps maximise the investigation through ‘The Can result in lost or reduce evidence availability
golden hour’. The golden hour is the term used due to excessive delays (see ‘the golden hour’).
for the period immediately after an offence has
been committed, when material is readily
available in high volumes to the police. Positive
action in the period immediately after the report
of a crime minimises the amount of material that
could be lost to the investigation, and maximises
the chance of securing the material that will be
admissible in court.
Stage 2: The Initial Investigation
Most crimes reported to the police are not major incidents and usually the officer who first attends is
the only resource that is required. This officer may be the investigator throughout the enquiry.
The quality of the investigation, whether carried out in person or over the telephone, is a significant
factor in gathering material that leads to the detection of a crime. There may be limited opportunities
to locate and gather material (see ‘the golden hour’) and it is vital that those who conduct the initial
investigation ensure that material is not lost. Once a crime has been allocated to an investigator, it is
important that they gather material from whoever took the initial report. Investigations should be
conducted thoroughly, and investigators should not assume that a crime cannot be solved or that
someone else will carry out an investigation at a later stage.
It is important to understand what sources of information / evidence are available to investigators, as
well as understanding why they are important and what can their problems or limitations are, but first
it is important to know what the impact is of effectively carrying out investigation procedures (and the
impact of not doing so):
The impact of effectively carrying out
investigation procedures
Pursuing all lines of enquiry: means the
investigator is not acting in accordance with
PACE and CPIA. CPIA requires that investigators
pursue all lines of enquiry, irrespective as to
whether they point towards or away from the
suspected person.
In following CPIA, the investigator is acting in
accordance with the law, and is acting both
thoroughly and professionally. Therefore, the
evidence collected is more likely to be
admissible in court but that the evidence will be
believed.
Investigators are expected to use as many
sources of evidence and intelligence as
necessary in pursuing their enquiries. The
nature and types of sources are dependent
upon the type of offence being committed. This
means it is necessary for investigators to
constantly assess what evidence they have,
what it means, what other evidence might be
available and from which sources.
The Impact of not effectively carrying out
investigation procedures
Not pursuing all lines of enquiry: means that the
investigator is not acting in accordance with PACE
and CPIA. Thus they are not acting in a fully
professional manner, and deficiencies in their
enquiries is likely to cast doubt on their
professionalism and whether their evidence can be
trusted. Failing to follow investigative legislation
and procedures suggest unprofessionalism, that
corners are cut and that the investigator might not
be acting in an honest matter. Furthermore, if all
lines of enquiry have not been pursued, then it is
questionable as to whether all available evidence
has been identified, collected and presented. If this
is the case, the correct outcome will be achieved.
Consequently, it is more likely that there will be a
miscarriage of justice, be that an innocent person
is convicted, or a guilty one acquitted.
Arguably the most famous case where
investigators failed to pursue all lines of enquiry
was the Stephen Lawrence case. In the Lawrence
case, police did not pursue all lines of enquiry, such
as conducting house to house enquiries, not
If the investigator is considered to be stopping a suspicious car, not searching and
professional and diligent by the magistrates / arresting suspects in a timely manner.
judge / jury are more inclined to accept the
evidence being presented. It is more likely that,
because of the thoroughness of the evidence
collected, that the evidence collected will result
in the correct outcome (guilty or not guilty) and
that a miscarriage of justice will be avoided.
Recording information / evidence correctly:
CPIA requires that all evidence be recorded,
retained and then revealed. It is therefore of
key importance that the ‘3 Rs’ are complied with
by investigators. Where the 3 Rs have been
complied with, then the both the prosecution
and defence will be in a position to determine
which course of action is most appropriate (e.g.
to prosecute, whether further enquires are
necessary in the case of the prosecution, and
whether to advise their client to plead guilt or
not guilty in the case of the defence).
The result was a longstanding miscarriage of
justice, one only rectified years later.
Source: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/thelawrence-report-litany-of-errors-by-bungling-police1073026.html
Failing to record information / evidence correctly:
Where the 3 Rs have not been complied with, the
prosecuting lawyer is basing their decision to
prosecute or to refer the case back to the
investigator, on incomplete or misleading evidence
or information.
This is inefficient and an
unnecessary delay for victims.
Failing to
adequately or accurately record information can
result in oversights, and lost opportunities to
investigate time-sensitive leads. This might result
in evidence that was available at time
disappearing. Accordingly, this can result in a
miscarriage of justice, where the guilty go fee.
By adhering to the 3 Rs, the prosecution is
better placed to advise the investigator:
It can result in a prosecution being undertaken
when it should not, due to not all evidence being
1) Whether the case is suitable for prosecution; disclosed, or worse, failing to disclose evidence
that suggests that the accused is innocent could
2) Whether is should be disposed of by some result in a trial or even a conviction. The case of
other means (e.g. police caution, no further Liam Allan (charged with rape) collapsed after it
action, etc);
was revealed that police had not disclosed texts to
Mr Allan from the alleged victim, which proved his
3) Whether further enquiries should be innocence.
undertaken, and the nature of those enquiries. Source:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/liamallan-met-police-rape-accusation-false-evidencedisclosure-arrest-mistake-detectives-a8184916.html
Remember:
“For distinction standard, learners must evaluate all the stages of the investigation process. The
evaluation should include the impact of effectively carrying out procedures compared to the impact of
when stages are not executed efficiently and accurately. Learners should conclude the overall impact
this may have on the criminal investigation. Learners should compare and contrast the resources
available during a criminal investigation, including advantages and disadvantages of resources used,
giving examples where possible.”
The next step in initial investigations is to understand the various sources of information and their
strengths/importance and limitations. The table on the following page covers all sources detailed within
the BTEC unit overview. You will need to detail/describe and discuss the strengths/importance and
limitations/problems of several of them.
Sources of Evidence Available to Investigators
Sources of Information / Evidence
Technical Aids
Bugs / Listening Devices
Strengths / Values of the Info / Evidence
Gain high=quality, detailed information and evidence from
the suspects themselves, without their knowledge. This is
intrusive surveillance under RIPA, so it can only be
undertaken in limited circumstances (serious crimes) and
needs prior authorisation, otherwise it will be inadmissible.
CCTV
CCTV can give prime evidence, giving proof of what happened
(assuming it was captured by the camera). The potential
problems are that investigators have to demonstrate that
the CCTV images have not been tampered with.
Electronic Facial Recognition ID
Facial recognition data systems can quickly and accurately
identify individuals, placed them at specific locations at a
specific time. The potential problems are that their use is
controversial and that individuals can avoid detection by use
of countermeasures which mask their faces.
Forensic Gait Analysis
These systems match or identify people by how they walk, so
provide an excellent identification tool with the ability to
place people at certain locations. Potential problems are that
they are not widely used and that you actually need
comparison evidence (footprints, video footage).
Automatic Number Plate Recognition These cameras and software identify and record car number
plates, so they can place a car at a specific time and place,
which provides both strong evidence and intelligence data.
The weakness of this is that there are a limited number of
cameras (so not every road is covered), it does not provide
data as to who is in the car and number plates are easily
masked or covered up, preventing detection by the software.
Phone Tapping
Phone tapping provides valuable intelligence as it can
establish both past, present and future (planned) criminal
activity. The biggest problem with phone tapping is that it
currently cannot be used as evidence.
Communications Data Surveillance
Provides valuable data regarding messages sent, location of
individuals at any time (assuming their mobile telephone is
on), shows a connection between individuals. This is intrusive
surveillance under RIPA, so it can only be undertaken in
limited circumstances (serious crimes) and needs prior
authorisation, otherwise it will be inadmissible.
Electoral Register
The electoral register is searchable, and can find the home
address of a suspect, however, it does have some
disadvantages: not everyone registers to vote, and the
register is out of date by the time it is published.
Social Media Sites
Social media sites can show friendships between individuals
(proving a connection between them) and provide evidence
Social Media Sites (Cont.)
Profiling techniques
Intelligence Databases
Police National Computer (PNC)
through messages sent and received. The drawback is that
social media sites often require court orders before they
release data.
Additionally, this is intrusive surveillance under RIPA, so it can
only be undertaken in limited circumstances (serious crimes)
and needs prior authorisation, otherwise it will be
inadmissible.
Criminal profiling can provide valuable insights as to the
personal characteristics of an offender, their motivations,
how the select victims and where they are likely to strike
next.
The PNC contains details of all criminal records (including
cautions given), it also has records relating car ownership
(from DVLA) and intelligence data, e.g. known aliases,
descriptions of offenders, known associates and a note of
investigation agencies who either have a live interest in a
named individual, or who are actively investigating a named
individual. The limitations of the system is that it provides
intelligence only, not evidence, e.g. in most cases you cannot
disclose a suspect’s criminal record before the verdict has
been delivered.
Home Office Large Major Enquiry HOLMES is used for the most serious investigation cases
System (HOLMES)
(murder, serial rape, etc.). It is a large database in which any
information concerning the investigation is input and can be
retrieved. It provides information concerning suspects,
patterns of behaviour and can be used to construct a timeline of events. The drawback is, that like all databases, it is
only as good as the information input, and that the system is
only used for the most serious cases, which constitute a
minority of all cases.
National Ballistics Intelligence Service The National Ballistics Intelligence Service delivers fast-time
(NABIS)
forensic intelligence as well as tactical and strategic
intelligence to tackle all aspects of firearms related
criminality within the UK. NABIS has a database of recovered
firearms and ammunition used in crime, or enter police
possession through any means. This Database provides
strategic and tactical intelligence which helps to guide law
enforcement activity. The potential disadvantages of NABIS
are that very few crimes involve firearms and not every
firearm will be registered with the site (e.g. firearms which
hadn’t been previously used in a crime).
National DNA database
The National DNA database contains details of offenders’
DNA, thus it can quickly match DNA found at the scene of a
crime to an offender. It match DNA from siblings, parents
and children to an offender. The limitation of this database
is that the DNA of new offenders will not be registered.
Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency The DVLA database contains information of all registered
(DVLA) database
motor vehicles in the UK and of all individuals who have been
Motor Insurers’ Bureau (MIB)
Other Sources
Crime Statistics
Eyewitness reports
Autopsy and Toxicology Reports
Recorded 999 calls
issued with a driver’s licence. It includes details of points on
the driver’s licence and details concerning vehicles, such as if
they have been registered as having been an insurance
‘write-off’. The limitations of the system are that it is reliant
upon owners notifying the DVLA that they have sold a car,
and who they have sold that car to.
The MIB maintains a database of all insured and uninsured
vehicles in the United Kingdom. The limitations of the
database is that it does not always accurately show who has
ownership of uninsured vehicles.
Crime statistics can give valuable information regarding
patterns of crime, e.g. that 60% of domestic burglaries occur
in 15 specific roads between 10am and 2pm. Such
information allows for a better, more targeted response. The
limitations of this data is that patterns can change as
offenders’ modus operandi changes, and that offenders can
simply move away from previously targeted areas (e.g. when
they believe that there is too much police presence or they
have exhausted properties to burgle).
Eyewitness reports can provide a great deal of data regarding
what happened, when, how and who was responsible. When
taking a statement from eyewitnesses, investigators must
address the mnemonic ‘ADVOKATE’ (Amount of time
observed, Distance between the witness and what they
observed, Visibility conditions at the time, Obstructions
between the witness and what they observed, whether the
person observed was Known to the witness, Any particular
reason to remember the event or the suspect, the amount
of Time the witness observed the event or the suspect for,
Errors in the description between the witness and the
suspects actual appearance. Limitations of eyewitness
evidence is that eyewitness evidence is notoriously
inaccurate.
Autopsy reports can reveal a great deal of information, such
as time of death, cause of death, it can even provide
information concerning the place of death (soil, vegetation,
carpet fibres, etc) and information concerning the offender
(height, whether the assailant was left or right handed). Such
reports can also provide details regarding the weapon used
and DNA evidence regarding the offender (from skin under
the victim’s nails, semen, blood, etc.).
Recorded 999 calls can provide a vast amount of information,
information which helps direct an investigation. This
information can help identify the offender(s), vehicles they
are using, etc. Some calls, such as ‘first complaint’ in rape
cases can be used in evidence (first complaint cases are
where the victim first reports that they have been raped).
Keystroke
software
/
Typing
The limitation of such calls is that usually they do not
constitute evidence.
recognition Keystroke recognition technology extracts the distinctive
characteristics found in typed sequences of characters, and
creates a statistically unique signature from the typing
patterns of a person. These distinctive features include the
duration for which keys are held and the elapsed time
between successive keystrokes.
Scientific research has proven that Keystroke Dynamics is
reliable and accurate. A National Bureau of Standards (NBS)
study concluded that keystroke biometric authentication
achieved at least 98% accuracy. Since then, the technology of
keystroke biometric has further improved to the level that is
comparative to other biometric solutions such as fingerprint
and voiceprint. The limitations are that most offences do not
involved keyboards or typing. It is also an area where the
defence is likely to contest the validity of the science.
Fingerprint data
Like most DNA, fingerprints are unique to an individual, so
where an offender has left fingerprints at the scene of a crime
this proves that they were there. The limitations of
fingerprints are that they are only of evidential value where
they can be matched against those of the offender. A further
limitation can be that through using gloves or some other
barrier (superglue, socks, etc.), no fingerprints will be left.
The quality of the investigation, whether carried out in person or over the telephone, is a significant
factor in gathering material that leads to the detection of a crime. There may be limited opportunities
to locate and gather material and it is vital that those who conduct the initial investigation ensure that
material is not lost. Once a crime has been allocated to an investigator, it is important that they gather
material from whoever took the initial report. Investigations should be conducted thoroughly, and
investigators should not assume that a crime cannot be solved or that someone else will carry out an
investigation at a later stage. Officers initially deployed to an incident are likely to have a number of
competing demands placed on them.
These demands include: dealing with a violent situation providing first aid and calling for medical
assistance reassuring victims and witnesses preventing public disorder.
Other initial investigation factors The following factors should be considered at the initial investigation:
- scene management (identify and preserve)
- material (identify other potential evidence sources)
- who is the investigating officer?
- risk management
- what is the limit of the initial attending officer’s role?
- Communication - record keeping
- investigative interviewing (witness, victim and offender)
- initial search (access routes, exit routes, places where offenders are likely to have been).
Investigators should call for assistance from supervisors where it appears that a major crime has been
committed, such as homicide or rape. While officers wait for assistance their priorities should be to:
preserve life, preserve scenes, secure evidence and identify victims and suspects.
Step 3: Initial Investigation Evaluation
The investigation evaluation stage is where the facts and evidence (‘material’) of the case are
considered, evaluated and the key points consider:
- Is there sufficient evidence to continue with an investigation;
- Are there any new of further lines of enquiry to pursue;
- Has all available evidence been collected;
- Have all potential witnesses been interviewed;
- Are there any contradictions or areas requiring further clarity;
- Has a suspect or suspects been identified;
- If so, the strength of the evidence linking the offender to the offence.
Having evaluated the evidence, investigators are then in a position to weigh up their evidence and, if
the case is to continue, plan for the next steps, be they contacting further witnesses, pursuing new lines
of enquiry, etc. The investigative plan should be based on a rigorous evaluation of the material that has
been gathered to date and should include the following factors:
- specific objectives of the investigation
- these depend on the unique circumstances of the crime and the material that has been gathered
- investigative strategies that are used to achieve those objectives
Resource requirements of the investigation in many cases is limited to the investigator, crime scene
examination, and forensic analysis of the material recovered from the scene or suspect. It is therefore
important that the
It is part of an investigator’s responsibility to articulate their resource requirement to managers. In
circumstances where the initial investigation and evaluation have led to the identification of a suspect,
and there is sufficient material to justify interviewing the suspect under caution, the investigation is
likely to move straight into the suspect management phase.
In terms of evaluating the finding of the initial investigation, the consequences of an effective review of
the initial investigation:
Getting it Right
A thorough review of the evidence can help
identify whether the case is ready for the next
stage (subject management), whether there is no
further action or whether further enquiries are
necessary. The review allows for an objective
examination of the evidence, whereby the
investigator can take a step back and objectively
assess precisely where the investigation is and
where it needs to go.
Getting it Wrong
If the case is not reviewed thoroughly or
objectively, then there can be serious problems.
The investigator may be unable to identify flaws
in the case of evidential weakness, which require
further investigation. The investigator might also
overlook where the evidence leads towards
another person or another line of enquiry. This
might result in no-one being interviewed, or the
interview being fundamentally flawed because
evidential weaknesses.
Therefore getting it right means that:
Therefore, getting it wrong means that:
1. All appropriate enquiries are undertaken;
1. Appropriate lines of enquiry
remain
2. All relevant sources of information/evidence outstanding;
are checked;
2. Potentially, there may be vital evidence
3. All necessary and relevant evidence has been outstanding;
collated before the next stage of the information,
e.g. interviewing the suspect under caution.
3. The investigator will not be fully prepared for
the next stage of the investigation, and the whole
investigation could fail.
Step 4: Suspect Management
Once a suspect(s) has been identified, there are a number of measures to consider and/or take:
Step
Arrest
Issues
Thought must be given to the timing of an arrest, where the arrest should take place,
the resources required (e.g. how many officers may be needed for the arrest),
whether special considerations must be given, i.e. is the suspect known to be
violent, will they require specialist treatment post-arrest due to a disability, will a
translated be needed, and if so, when. Timing is a key factor, as it is imperative that
evidence be secured, and if an arrest is unduly delayed, this might threaten the
quality and quantity of evidence available.
Where the arrest is well planned and well effected, the arrest will be made quickly,
efficiently, safely and all possible evidence will be secured.
Where the arrest has not been well planned and/or executed, a number of problems
could occur:
1) It may take several attempts to arrest the offender – this could tip them off, and
they could destroy evidence, or even result in the offender going into hiding, and
evading arrest;
2) Officers could be unnecessarily injured, or worse;
3) Evidential harm could result, e.g. an admission/confession made could be
inadmissible if a translator was not present;
4) Officers/investigators could be injured or otherwise exposed to unnecessary risk.
Searches
Thought must also be given to searches to be made before, during and after arrest,
in order to secure the maximum amount and quality of evidence. Factors such as
identifying premises owned or controlled by the suspect, the location and timing of
searches, the level of security and amount of surprise required. Consideration
needs to be given to whether specialist equipment is required (battering rams,
sniffer dogs, etc.) and to the numbers of officers required to conduct the search(es).
Consideration also needs to be given to whether a search warrant, rather than
relying on search powers under PACE, need to be obtained and the timing of
obtaining those warrants.
Where searches are well planned and executed, the chances of all appropriate and
relevant evidence being secured are maximised. Searches will be efficient, all
relevant properties will be searched, being done so safety and with appropriate
numbers of officers and resources conducting the search.
Where searches are neither well planned nor executed, the chances of all
appropriate and relevant evidence being secured are lessened. Problems arising
from poorly planned and executed searches are:
1) A failure to identify and collect all available evidence;
2) The offender is in a position to ‘tip off’ co-conspirators, who can move or destroy
available evidence;
3) The evidence is rendered inadmissible;
4) Officers/investigators could be injured or otherwise exposed to unnecessary risk.
Identification
Eyewitness identifying the offender(s) can be a key part of the case, as can matching
fingerprints, DNA, footprints, etc. Such evidence can directly place the offender at
the scene of the crime.
When securing identification, PACE Code of Practice D applies, and it is important
adhere to the code in full, otherwise secured evidence could be ruled as being
inadmissible. Code of Practice D provides guidance on the following areas of
identification:
- Identity parades;
- Alternatives to identity parades (video, photographs, ‘confrontation’, etc.);
- Fingerprints;
- Footwear impressions;
- DNA and other body samples.
Where the investigator has correctly considered and obtained all available identity
evidence:
1) The evidence will have been collected in accordance with PACE Code of Practice
D, and will therefore be admissible;
2) The evidence could prove that the suspect was at the scene of the crime;
3) The evidence could prove that the suspect is the offender.
Where the investigator has not correctly considered and obtained all available
identity evidence:
1) The evidence they collect can be ruled as inadmissible;
2) Not all available or appropriate evidence has been obtained;
3) The offender is not identified and escapes successful prosecution.
Interviews
Interviews (under caution) are a key element of any investigation.
An interview under caution may provide :
1) important evidence against the suspect, which you would otherwise be unable
to obtain;
2) important information revealing further lines of inquiry;
3) relevant information to be considered in the prosecution decision.
Prior to the interview, the investigator, should prepare thoroughly for the interview.
One method of investigative interviewing, known as the PEACE model, assumes the
above: that a relaxed subject with whom the interviewer has rapport, is more likely
to cooperate. Not to mention that it’s far pleasant for both parties if the atmosphere
isn’t charged with aggression and intimidation. PEACE stands for:





Preparation and Planning
Engage and Explain
Account, Clarify and Challenge
Closure
Evaluation
A non-accusatory, information gathering approach to investigative interviewing, the
PEACE model is considered to be best practice and is suitable for any type of
interviewee, victim, witness or suspect.
Interviews under caution are also governed by PACE Codes of Practice C Code C the detention, treatment and questioning of persons by police officers, Code E - the
audio recording of interviews with suspects at police stations and Code F - the visual
recording of interviews with suspects at police stations
Where the interview has been well prepared, well planned and well executed:
1) The interview is more likely to be conducted in accordance with PACE Codes of
Practice, and will be admissible as evidence;
2) A full and detailed account of events will be obtained from the suspect(s);
3) Further lines of enquiry may be identified;
4) Further suspects may be identified;
5) Inconsistencies between the suspect’s account and evidence collected can be
obtained;
6) The suspect’s account will be fully tested, and the suspect may confess.
Where the interview has not been well prepared, well planned and well executed:
1) The interview may be inadmissible due to breaches of PACE;
2) A limited account of events may be obtained from the suspect;
3) Potentially important new lines of inquiry may not be identified;
4) Additional suspects may not be identified;
5) Potential inconsistencies between the suspect’s account and evidence collected
will not be obtained;
6) The suspect’s account will be fully tested, and an opportunity for the suspect to
confess to the offence might be missed.
Step 5: Evidential Evaluation
As with step 3, the evidential evaluation stage is where the facts and evidence (‘material’) of the case
are considered, evaluated and the key points consider:
- Is there sufficient evidence to charge an offender, if so, with what offence;
- Are there any new of further lines of enquiry to pursue;
- Has all available evidence been collected;
- Have all potential witnesses been interviewed;
- Are there any contradictions or areas requiring further clarity;
- Has a suspect or suspects been identified;
- If so, the strength of the evidence linking the offender to the offence.
Having evaluated the evidence, investigators and prosecutors are in a position to weigh up whether the
case is to continue to prosecution, for no further action and plan for the next steps, be they contacting
further witnesses, pursuing new lines of enquiry, etc. The investigative plan should be based on a
rigorous evaluation of the material that has been gathered to date and should include the following
factors:
- specific objectives of the investigation
- these depend on the unique circumstances of the crime and the material that has been gathered
- investigative strategies that are used to achieve those objectives
Resource requirements of the investigation in many cases is limited to the investigator, crime scene
examination, and forensic analysis of the material recovered from the scene or suspect. It is therefore
important that the
It is part of an investigator’s responsibility to articulate their resource requirement to managers. In
circumstances where the initial investigation and evaluation have led to the identification of a suspect,
and there is sufficient material to justify interviewing the suspect under caution, the investigation is
likely to move straight into the suspect management phase.
To determine whether material or enquiries are relevant to the investigation, investigators need to
ask ‘does this have the capacity to impact on the case?’ The identity or identification of a suspect may
no longer be an issue and so the material held regarding this line of enquiry may no longer be
relevant. This could include CCTV footage which was held in the hope of identifying a suspect in the
vicinity.
In some circumstances the CCTV footage might still be relevant for other reasons, therefore,
investigators have to justify its retention to themselves and others.
Step 6: Case Management
Once the suspect has been charged, there are a number of matters which investigators must manage
before a case goes to court. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and police are jointly responsible for
the prosecution of the case after a suspect has been charged. If further investigative action is required,
investigators will liaise closely with the CPS.
The Decision to charge
In a criminal case, if there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction against each
suspect on each charge, a decision to charge is made. Depending on the type and seriousness of the
offence committed, this decision is made by the police service or the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
Referral to the CPS for pre-charge advice
For charging advice on serious,
complex and contested cases,
prosecutors and police officers
can meet at an agreed venue.
For less serious charging
decisions, CPS lawyers listen to
police officers’ accounts over
the telephone
They then
decide whether there is
sufficient evidence to charge a
person and what that charge
should be.
The CPS may require further
evidence to be obtained before
a charging decision can be
made, or to strengthen the case
to secure a successful outcome. The prosecutor will advise the police officer of the further material
required. This advice will also bring an early conclusion to those cases that cannot be strengthened by
further evidence.
Charging process
The Code for Crown Prosecutors advises that any charging decisions should:


reflect the seriousness of the offending
give the court adequate sentencing powers as well as powers to impose appropriate postconviction orders
Police charge cases
The police may charge:



all summary offences irrespective of plea and any either way offences anticipated as a guilty plea
and suitable for sentence in a magistrates’ court, except for
o a case requiring the consent to prosecute by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) or
law officer
o a case involving a death
o a case connected with terrorist activity or official secrets
o a case classified as hate crime or domestic violence under CPS policies
o violent disorder or affray
o wounding or grievous bodily harm
o actual bodily harm
o Sexual Offences Act 2003 offences committed by or upon a person under 18
o an offence under the Licensing Act 2003
criminal damage to property valued at less than £5,000, irrespective of plea if suitable
for summary trial
handling and receiving stolen goods and offences under the Fraud Act 2006 where a guilty plea
is anticipated and the case is suitable for sentence in a magistrates’ court.
Prosecution
In all aspects of managing offenders, officers should be familiar with the requirement to
consult CPS prosecutors to obtain early legal advice and decisions on charges.
Preparing a file of evidence
Once a court date is agreed and a case is to proceed, the prosecution file for the first hearing must be
created proportionately to the requirements of that hearing, while at the same time providing the
prosecutor with sufficient information to be able to conclude the case if the plea is guilty. It must also
enable the prosecutor to conduct an effective plea and case management hearing to identify the
contested issues if a not guilty plea is entered. The only exception to this requirement is where the
charging decision has been made applying the Threshold Test.
Disclosure
Disclosure refers to providing the defence with copies of, or access to, any material which might
reasonably be considered capable of undermining the case for the prosecution against the accused, or
of assisting the case for the accused, and which has not previously been disclosed. The police must
retain and record any unused material, ie, material that may be relevant to the investigation that has
been retained but does not form part of the case for the prosecution against the accused.
The disclosure process is a statutory duty under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations
Act 1996 (CPIA) and its code of practice. There is also a common law duty on the prosecutor to disclose
material before the duty arises under the Act where it is significant, eg, a victim’s previous convictions
or information that might affect a bail decision. The police also have a duty to provide the CPS with
information that may mitigate the seriousness of an offence. The investigator must inform the
prosecutor as early as possible of any material that weakens the case against the accused.
The CPIA sets out distinct roles relating to disclosure which impose different duties on the police,
including those of the investigator, officer in charge and disclosure officer. Not everything that is
revealed to the CPS is disclosed to the defence. Generally, a prosecutor’s duty to disclose unused
material to the defence is triggered by:


a not guilty plea in the magistrates’ court
a committal, eg, the service of evidence in an indictable only case sent to the crown court or on
transfer of a case for trial to the crown court.
The duty of disclosure continues for as long as proceedings remain, whether at first instance or
on appeals against conviction and/or sentence. Not all unused material is revealed to the prosecutor
on schedules (see CPS (2005) Disclosure Manual for full details). There is an agreement between
the CPS and ACPO that crime reports and incident logs will be revealed to the CPS as a matter of
routine. In addition, a broad spectrum of other material will also form part of disclosure.
Investigative Interviewing
The aim of investigative interviewing is to obtain accurate and reliable accounts from:



Victims,
Witnesses, and/or
Suspects
about matters under police investigation. To be accurate, information should be as complete as
possible without any omissions or distortion. To be reliable, the information must have been given
truthfully and be able to withstand further scrutiny, e.g., in court. Accurate and reliable accounts ensure
that the investigation can be taken further by opening up other lines of enquiry and acting as a basis for
questioning others.
Investigators must act fairly when questioning victims, witnesses or suspects. They must ensure that
they comply with all the provisions and duties under the Equality Act 2010 and the Human Rights Act
1998. Acting fairly means that the investigator must not approach any interview with prejudice. The
interviewer should be prepared to believe the account that they are being given, but use common sense
and judgement rather than personal beliefs to assess the accuracy of what is being said. People with
clear or perceived vulnerabilities should be treated with particular care, and extra safeguards should be
put in place.
Witness Interviews
A witness is considered as a person, other than a defendant, who is likely to give evidence in court. All
victims are also witnesses and should be treated as such.
The success of any investigation depends largely on the accuracy and detail of the material obtained
from witnesses. Investigators, whether tasked with a volume crime or major investigation, must
recognise the individual needs and concerns of witnesses and treat them with dignity and respect. This
can have a significant impact on how witnesses cooperate with the investigation and any subsequent
prosecution.
Witness considerations
Victims are also witnesses. The skills needed to interview witnesses are just as important as those
needed to deal appropriately with suspects. It is important that as much information as possible is
gathered from the witness and recorded in witness statements. Completing a crime report is an
opportunity to record information about the crime, including accurate and reliable information
obtained from witnesses.
Interviewers must treat all witnesses with sensitivity, impartiality and respect for their culture and
rights, while maintaining an investigative approach.
The interviewee may be suffering from shock or trauma as a result of the incident and be in need of
support. The police can help by making appropriate referrals to other agencies and by supplying
contact information. Any referrals should be made with the consent of the witness. It is important to
consider how a witness interview may be structured to obtain the best possible information.
Interviews should be conducted as soon as possible after the incident, in a quiet place, with minimum
distraction and maximum privacy (eg, a car or quiet room). If this is not possible, investigators should
consider arranging to conduct the interview later or elsewhere. A brief account of the main details
should be obtained. This should be recorded and signed by the witness, in a pocket notebook if an
alternative is not available.
Witness statements
Police officers are required to produce a statement from an interview conducted with a witness.
Statements may be taken at the scene immediately following an incident or at a later time or place, eg,
at a police station, the witness’s home or another location.
Investigators must be properly prepared. Any notes that are made must be retained, as the prosecution
may need to disclose any unused material.
The interviewer should ensure that the witness statement accurately reflects what the witness has
said.
The interviewer must also consider the relevant points to prove for the offence in question.
Where the witness is considered to be a significant witness, see video of witness interview.
Crime report
The interviewer should complete a crime report following the victim interview, in accordance with local
force policy. The crime report is an important document and forms the basis of any further
investigation.
If required, the crime report may be disclosed in evidence to defence lawyers, who will scrutinise it to
ensure that it is accurate and consistent with other evidence.
Crime reports must contain as much information as possible, to provide sufficient detail to assist any
officer who undertakes further investigation of the offence.
There a four stages to cognitive interviews: context reinstatement, reporting everything, recall from a
changed perspective and recall
Context Reinstatement
The interviewer tries to mentally reinstate the environmental and personal context of the crime for the
witnesses, perhaps by asking them about their general activities and feelings on the day. This could
include sights, sounds, feelings and emotions, the weather etc. In the interview, witnesses are often
asked to use all of their 5 senses in their recollection of the event. This can help in recreating the event
clearly in their mind and may trigger the recall of context dependent memories.
Report Everything
Witness are asked to report everything that happened, every detail not matter how inconsequential or
insignificant it might appear. In this way, apparently unimportant detail might act as a trigger for key
information about the event.
Recall from a Changed Perspective
Witnesses are asked to report the incident
from different perspective, describing
what they think other witnesses (or even
the criminals themselves) might have
seen.
Recall in Reverse (or Different) Order
Researchers Geiselman and Fisher (1992)
proposed that due to the recency effect,
people tend to recall more recent events
more clearly than others, thus witnesses
should be encouraged to work backwards
from the end to the beginning. In further
research, Geiselman et al (1985) found that the average number of correctly recalled facts for the
cognitive interview was 41.2, for hypnosis it was 38.0 and for the standard interview it was 29.4. There
was no significant difference in the number of errors in each condition.
Structuring a witness interview
A witness interview should be structured using the PEACE framework (see below).
It is possible to compare the PEACE model of interviewing with the Framework of Investigative
Interviewing as set out in MOJ (2011) Achieving Best Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Guidance on
Interviewing Victims and Witnesses, and using Special Measures. Most phases are compatible.
Various question types may be used, but in witness interviews it is considered good practice to
use free recall to encourage the individual to give an account of the situation.
Free recall
This is a system which can be used in interviews to encourage interviewees to put themselves back
into the situation they were in when they witnessed the incident.
A free recall interview includes:










asking the witness to provide an account of the relevant event(s) in their own words
(eg, ‘Earlier today you told me that you saw something last week, please tell me about that in
your own words’)
adopting a posture of active listening, allowing the witness to pause, and using
minimal prompts that do not go beyond the witness’s account
reflecting back what the witness has said, as appropriate
avoiding interrupting
identifying manageable topics or episodes in the witness’s account to be expanded on and
clarified
systematically probing each topic or episode, beginning with open questions using words such
as tell me, explain, describe, before moving on to closed-specific questions (eg, what, where,
when, how and why)
avoiding topic-hopping (rapidly moving from one topic to another and back again)
avoiding multiple questions
using forced-choice and leading questions only if it is essential to do so
systematically probing any information important to the investigation that the witness has
not adequately covered.
For example, where an incident took place while the witness was travelling to work, the investigator
may ask them to remember how they felt when they got into their vehicle that morning, what they
saw as they left the house, what the weather was like, and the traffic.
Helping the witness to recall details such as these will enable them to recall more accurately the
conditions that existed at the time of the incident.
The interviewer must undertake a number of tasks simultaneously when conducting free recall
interviews. A structure should, therefore, be in place for effective note-taking.
Note-taking
A structured process for note-taking enables the interviewer to process and respond to the quantity
and quality of information received in the interview.
This provides a firm basis for the questions that need to be asked to clarify or challenge the
interviewee’s account. A tape recording is made, in accordance with PACE, when interviewing
suspects. However, the interviewer still needs to make notes and use them to clarify the suspect’s
account.
The PEACE Model of Interviewing
Introduction to the PEACE Model of Interviewing
The PEACE Model of investigative interviewing was developed in the early 90s as a collaborative effort
between law enforcement and psychologists in England and Wales. This model takes a
conversational, non-confrontational
approach to getting information
from an investigation interview
subject. It was designed to reduce
the number of false confessions that
were being recorded due to overly
aggressive interviewing tactics.
Today, the PEACE Model is being
used successfully throughout the UK
and other countries, and is gaining
popularity in North America for its
ethical approach to information
gathering.
The model is called PEACE due to its
constituent parts:





preparation and planning
engage and explain
account
closure
evaluation
Planning and preparation
This is one of the most important
phases in effective interviewing. The success of the interview and, consequently, the investigation
could depend on it.
A planning session that takes account of all the available information and identifies the key issues and
objectives is required, even where it is essential that an early interview takes place.
Interviewers should consider the following:




create and record the interview plan
characteristics of the interviewee
practical arrangements
making a written interview plan.
Interview plan
Planning and preparation gives the interviewer the opportunity to:



review the investigation
establish what material is already available
decide on what the aims and objectives of the interview are.
Every interview must be prepared with the needs of the investigation in mind. How the material is
obtained during interview helps to establish the accuracy of the matter under investigation and should
be considered carefully.
The following questions may be helpful at this stage:




who needs to be interviewed and in what order?
why is a particular interviewee’s viewpoint so important?
what information should now be obtained?
should the interviewee be interviewed immediately or would it be more useful to wait until
more information has been obtained about the circumstances of the offence from other
sources?
Interviewee
Individual characteristics should be taken into account when planning and preparing for an interview.
Although not an exhaustive list, these may include:








age – knowing the interviewee’s age helps to determine the best time to undertake the
interview and whether an appropriate adult/interview supporter is required
cultural background – this can affect the way a person prefers to be addressed, and may also
indicate the need for an interpreter
religion or belief – eg, interviewers may need to take prayer requirements into account
domestic circumstances – this can help to identify other people who may be useful to the
investigation, eg, family, associates or neighbours
physical and mental health – knowledge of an existing medical condition and ensuring that
appropriate facilities are used
disability
previous contact with the police – this helps to determine factors such as the interviewee’s
reaction, and the interviewer’s safety
gender – in certain types of crime, eg, sexual offences or domestic violence, it is important to
consider the gender of the interviewee. Potentially sensitive issues such as an interviewee’s
sexual orientation or gender assignment should be approached tactfully, if these matters
become relevant to the interview.
Practical arrangements
The interviewer may need to consider a number of activities and practical considerations which may
help them to understand the circumstances of the offence, and to achieve the best interview from the
interviewee.
These include:



visiting the scene
searching relevant premises
location of the interview





role of interviewers
timings
equipment
exhibits and property
knowledge of the offence.
Written interview plan
The interview plan summarises the aim(s) of an interview and provides framework for questioning. It
can increase the confidence of the interviewer and provide the flexibility to conduct a professional and
effective interview. A written interview plan should be used for key witnesses, as well as suspects. It
should include:









the time a suspect has been in custody (investigators should be aware of the detention clock and
its impact on the interview)
the range of topics to be covered around identified time parameters (this may vary depending
on whether it is a witness or suspect interview)
the points necessary to prove the potential offence(s) under investigation
any points which may be a defence for committing the offence(s) under investigation
introduction of exhibits
material which suggests the suspect may have committed the offence
identified information which may assist the investigation
any other relevant points, eg, actus reus (guilty act), mens rea (guilty mind), intention, no valid
defence
planning for a prepared statement, special warnings, adverse inference, significant comments or
silences.
he plan should record who will be the lead interviewer, and who is responsible for note-taking. It is
important that interviewers understand their respective roles and maintain the role agreed. Two
interviewers asking multiple questions in an unstructured manner is unlikely to achieve the interview’s
objective.
Engage and explain
The first step to encouraging conversation is to engage the interviewee. This is not always easy,
especially if the person is previously unknown to the police.
Active listening assists the interviewer to establish and maintain a rapport. This then enables them to:



identify topics during the interview and, therefore, manage the conversation
communicate interest to the interviewee in their account
identify important evidential information.
Factors such as the interviewee’s background and personal characteristics should be taken into
account.
Beginning the interview
This is important and should be considered in the planning stage. The reason for the interview should
also be clearly explained, eg, the interviewer may say:


‘You are here because you have been arrested for (offence)’ or
‘You are here because you witnessed (offence/incident).’
The interviewer should then check the interviewee has understood the explanation.
Objectives of the interview
Before starting an interview, the objectives of the interview should be explained to the interviewee,
and they should be provided with an outline or route map of it.
For example, interviewers may say:

‘During this interview I will talk to you about (list objectives).’
Then go on to explain:

‘I will also ask you about anything else which may become relevant during the interview in order
to properly establish the facts and issues.’
Routines and expectations
It is good practice to explain to the interviewee that if they nod or shake their head the interviewer will
state that they have done so. It should also be explained that notes will be taken during the interview.
It may be useful to inform the interviewee that although the police wish to establish certain facts and
issues, it is the interviewee’s opportunity to explain their involvement or non-involvement in the
incident under investigation.
Investigators should encourage the interviewee to voice anything which they feel is relevant, explaining
that there is no time limit for the interview and that as much detail as possible is required, encouraging
the interviewee to voice anything which they feel is relevant.
The interviewee should be reassured that they will not be interrupted. It may be appropriate to ask the
interviewee to consider fully any question they are being asked before they answer.
Account, clarification, challenge
Obtaining an account consists of both initiating and supporting. In volume and priority crime
investigations the most common way of initiating an account is simply to use an open-ended prompt,
such as, ‘tell me what happened’.
Obtaining the suspect’s account includes:


non-verbal behaviour such as adopting an appropriate posture and orientation towards
the interviewee
allowing the interviewee to pause so that they can search their memory, without interrupting

encouraging the interviewee to continue reporting their account until it is complete by
using simple utterances such as ‘mm mm’ and prompts, eg, ‘What happened next?’ or
questions that reflect what the interviewee has said, such as, ‘He hit you?’.
Clarify and expand the interviewee’s account by:



breaking the account down into manageable topics
systematically probing those topics by means of open-ended and specific-closed questions until
as full a picture as possible of the interviewee’s account has been obtained
examining any information, identified during the planning phase, that has not already been
covered.
Questions
These should be as short and simple as possible. They should not contain jargon or other language
which the interviewee may not understand.
Some types of questions are useful, helping the interviewer to extract information from the
interviewee, eg, open-ended. Others are not and may actually confuse the interviewee or prevent
them from giving a full and accurate account, eg, multiple questions.
Five key question types





open-ended
specific-closed
forced-choice
multiple
leading.
Open-ended
For example, ‘Tell me’, ‘Describe’, ‘Explain’.


are useful at the beginning of an interview as they allow for a full, unrestricted account
produce answers which are less likely to have been influenced by the interviewer.
The interviewer should avoid interrupting the interviewee when asking open questions.
Specific-closed
For example, ‘Who did that?’ ‘What did he say?’ ‘Where does he live?’ ’When did this happen?’ This
type of question:




gives the interviewer with more control
can be used to elicit information that an interviewee has not yet provided in response to openended questions
may be used to clarify and extend an account that has been elicited through openended questions, cover information important to the investigation that an interviewee has not
already been mentioned, or to challenge
may have the potential disadvantage of restricting an interviewee’s account.
Forced-choice
For example, ‘Was the car an estate or a saloon?’ In this situation:



interviewees might guess the answer by selecting one of the options given
interviewees might simply say ‘yes’ in response to the question, leaving the interviewer to
guess which part of the question the response applies to, or needing to ask a follow-up question
to clarify it
the choice of answer given to the interviewee might not contain the correct information,
eg, ‘was it dark blue or light blue’, when it could have been medium blue.
Multiple
For example, ‘Where did he come from, what did he look like and where did he go to?’ These questions
may also refer to multiple concepts, eg,’What did they look like’ and confusion might arise as a result
of the:


interviewee not knowing which part of the question to answer
the interviewer not knowing which part of the question the answer refers to.
Leading
For example, ‘You saw the gun, didn’t you?’ implies the answer or assumes facts that are likely to be
disputed. They can also:



be used to introduce information not already mentioned, eg, ‘What did he look like?’
have an adverse influence on interviewee’s response
distort the interviewee’s memory
The information obtained as a result of leading questions may be less credible and in extreme cases
could be ruled inadmissible. They should, therefore, be used only as a last resort.
Closure
This should be planned and structured so that the interview does not end abruptly.
Where there are two interviewers, the lead interviewer should check that the second interviewer has
no further questions before closing the interview.
The interviewer should accurately summarise what the interviewee has said, taking account of any
clarification that the interviewee wishes to make.
Any questions the interviewee asks should be dealt with.
The interviewer should then bring the interview to a conclusion by preparing a witness statement if
appropriate or, where the interviewee is a suspect, by announcing the date and time before turning
the recording equipment off.
They should then explain to the interviewee what will happen next.
Evaluation
Following an interview, the interviewer needs to evaluate what has been said with a view to:



determining whether any further action is necessary
determining how the interviewee’s account fits in with the rest of the investigation
reflecting on the interviewer’s performance.