What Police Can and Can't Do in Interrogations

If you believe what you see on television and in the movies, law enforcement is allowed to do whatever it takes to get a confession from a criminal suspect. The truth is that, while the police can engage in questionable interrogation tactics, there are some things they cannot do.

Here, we’ll discuss the tactics law enforcement employs when questioning someone about a crime. We will describe some of the deceptive tactics officers are permitted to use, as well as interrogation techniques the courts deem unlawful.

If you’re involved in a criminal case and believe the police have violated your constitutional rights, consult a criminal defense attorney immediately.

What Qualifies as an Interrogation?

Before we discuss a suspect’s rights during a police interrogation, it’s important to understand what an interrogation is. An interrogation occurs when police question someone about a crime. However, not all interrogations trigger the same constitutional protections.

The key distinction is between custodial and non-custodial interrogations. A custodial interrogation occurs when police question someone who is not free to leave. This doesn’t necessarily mean the person is under arrest—it simply means they cannot leave until the officer says they can.

The constitutional rights that attach during a custodial interrogation (such as Miranda warnings) don’t apply to casual conversations or non-custodial interviews where the person is free to walk away at any time.

When law enforcement takes someone into custody for questioning, they must issue a Miranda warning. When they invite someone to participate in a voluntary interview where the person is free to leave, they are not required to do so.

What Happens During Police Interrogations?

Most police interrogations follow a common pattern. First, the officers introduce themselves to the suspect in custody and explain the purpose of the interview. The officers will then ask a broad question and give the suspect a chance to narrate their version of events.

The officers may interrupt this narrative at certain points, trying to glean key information about the alleged crime they are investigating. They will also take notes of what the suspect says throughout the interrogation.

Throughout the interrogation, the officers will employ various questioning techniques. For instance, some cops push hard for a voluntary confession by the suspect. In other cases, the officers conducting the interview show the suspect pictures of the crime scene, trying to shock the individual into confessing. The specific interrogation technique will depend on the facts of the case and the stage of the investigation.

Once the officers are done asking their questions, they will decide how the interrogation will end. This will depend on what the suspect tells them during the meeting. It will also depend partly on whatever evidence law enforcement already has.

Legal Interrogation Techniques

The rules for police interrogations are not set in stone. Members of law enforcement learn their interrogation tactics through training and from one another. Officers adopt the techniques that work best for them. Some people would be surprised by the kinds of things police can get away with during a suspect interview.

Some of the more common techniques officers use when interrogating a suspect include:

The Reid Technique

The Reid technique is a commonly used interrogation tactic developed in the 1950s by former Chicago police officer John E. Reid. It involves a factual analysis coupled with a psychological analysis of the suspect and the crime scene before the interrogation even begins. Then, investigators will try to gather baseline information from the suspect by having what feels like a non-accusatory conversation. The goal is to minimize the guilt the suspect may feel to elicit a confession.

If they believe the suspect is guilty, the investigator will transition to a more structured interrogation format. They’ll often outright tell the suspect that the evidence points to their guilt (whether it actually does or not). They’ll put pressure on the suspect to confess by offering help or sympathy in exchange for a confession. The interrogator might suggest a moral or psychological justification for the crime (e.g., it was an accident or that the victim provoked it).

Critics argue that this technique has the potential to lead to false confessions from innocent people.

The PEACE Method

This is a five-step process law enforcement uses during interrogations. The five steps are meant to slowly make the suspect comfortable enough to confess to the crime. The steps are as follows:

• Preparation and planning: Gather evidence and set objectives for the meeting.

• Engaging the suspect: Establish rapport with the suspect and explain the purpose of the interview.

• Account, clarify, and challenge: Allow the suspect to tell their version of events while pointing out any points that need clarification. This is where the officer points out inconsistencies in the suspect’s story and asks for explanations.

• Closure: Summarize the key points from the interview and tell the suspect what the next step is.

• Evaluate: Review the notes from the interrogation and decide what needs to happen (arrest, release, etc.)

It’s common for police to use psychological tactics to elicit a confession from the suspect. Law enforcement may create an environment where the suspect feels isolated and trapped, or play “good cop, bad cop.” While these police interrogation tactics may not seem fair, they are not illegal.

Law Enforcement Officers Can Engage in Deceptive Tactics

Some people are shocked to learn that police can use deception during their interrogations. In fact, they can outright lie to a suspect if it means they’ll elicit a confession (or secure information leading to the arrest of the actual culprit).

The general rule regarding deceptive interrogation tactics is that just about anything goes as long as the police can demonstrate it is necessary for justice and public safety.

Some of the more common deceptive tactics officers use during criminal interrogations include:

• Telling a suspect that the police have uncovered evidence connecting them to the crime when they haven’t actually collected any evidence.

• Advising the suspect that they have already interviewed people who confessed or who implicated the suspect in the crime.

• Interviewing a suspect for hours in an uncomfortable environment without breaks.

• Making false promises of leniency

• Making misleading statements and claims of false evidence

To successfully challenge the legitimacy of a police interrogation, your attorney will have to prove the officers acted in an extreme manner. Most judges maintain a presumption in favor of law enforcement.

How Long Can a Police Interrogation Last?

There is no hard-and-fast rule about how long a criminal interrogation can last. However, the duration of an interrogation typically depends on the nature and severity of the crime. For example, law enforcement will conduct a longer interrogation in a murder case as compared to a bad check writing case.

Generally, the average interrogation lasts about an hour and a half. Many interrogations are much shorter than this, lasting just half an hour, while others are much longer, with some lasting up to nine hours.

In extreme cases, law enforcement may interrogate a suspect for much longer than nine hours. In these situations, the officers may offer the suspect multiple breaks, along with offers of food, drinks, and cigarettes.

You should meet with a criminal defense lawyer to confirm the specific laws in your state regarding the duration of police interrogations.

Are There Special Interrogation Rules for Juveniles and Vulnerable Populations?

Law enforcement must follow special rules when interrogating minors and vulnerable individuals. Minors enjoy the same constitutional protections as adults. This means police officers must read juvenile offenders the *Miranda *warnings, which alert suspects to their rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present during questioning.

In addition to honoring a juvenile suspect’s constitutional rights, law enforcement must follow additional rules when questioning people under 18. These rules include, but are not limited to:

• Most jurisdictions require that juvenile suspects be allowed to have a parent or guardian present during interrogations.

• Most states also require law enforcement to notify a minor’s parent or guardian that the police have taken them into custody.

• If a juvenile intends to waive their rights, they must do so knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily.

• Most states have laws that offer additional protections to juvenile suspects. For instance, officers cannot deprive a young suspect of food or sleep during interrogations.

• Many jurisdictions have laws limiting the length of an interrogation with a juvenile or a vulnerable person.

If the police violate any of these rules, the court will deem the interrogation unlawful and exclude any evidence collected during the interview.

What Are the Recording Requirements for Police Officer Interrogations?

If you’re a fan of crime shows, you know that they usually show the police recording their criminal interrogations. Today, most jurisdictions voluntarily record their custodial interrogations. However, the laws on this topic vary by state.

Some states, such as Alaska, Arkansas, Minnesota, and Montana, require law enforcement to record all interrogations. Other states, such as Wisconsin, New Mexico, and Indiana, only require police to record interrogations in cases involving felonies.

You should ask your defense attorney what your local laws are when you first meet. If the police were supposed to record your interview and didn’t, you may be able to fight the state’s use of evidence collected during the interrogation.

How Can Illegal Police Questioning Tactics Impact Your Case?

One of the biggest concerns with deceptive and unlawful interrogation tactics is that they may result in involuntary confessions or false confessions. When the state presents its case, it isn’t going to point out the intricacies of your interrogation session. Instead, the prosecutor will offer proof of your confession as evidence of guilt.

There are other ways that illegal police questioning tactics can impact your criminal case. For example, if your attorney can prove that the interrogation was unlawful, it will negatively impact the state’s case.

Some of the ways this may happen include:

• It can undermine the state’s credibility and decrease the value of all the state’s evidence

• It may cast doubt on the reliability of the prosecution’s witnesses

• It may show that the police didn’t have probable cause to arrest you in the first place

While a false confession or illegal interrogation techniques will impact the state’s case, it can also have an impact on your case. If you can’t prove that law enforcement conducted an unlawful interrogation, the jury will take the state’s evidence as gospel. This will make it very difficult to challenge the state’s case and may lead to a wrongful conviction.

Can You Challenge Law Enforcement‘s Interrogation Methods?

Proving that law enforcement conducted an unlawful interrogation is not easy. While the state carries the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the court will presume that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor is untainted.

One of the basic tenets of our criminal justice system is that the state cannot use tainted evidence to prove an individual’s guilt. When the police obtain evidence through unlawful searches and seizures or unfair interrogation, the state cannot use that evidence at trial. This is due to something called the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine.

According to this doctrine, any evidence obtained through unlawful tactics is inadmissible at trial. It doesn’t matter how crucial the evidence may be to the prosecutor’s case. If law enforcement secured the evidence by violating a defendant’s constitutional rights, the judge must exclude it.

Obviously, convincing the judge to exclude critical evidence will go a long way toward an acquittal or a favorable plea bargain. If you firmly believe the police or other members of law enforcement violated your rights during an interrogation, let your criminal defense attorney know upfront.

Constitutional Protections During Interrogations

Several constitutional amendments protect your rights during police interrogations:

Your Right to Remain Silent (Fifth Amendment)

The Fifth Amendment protects you against self-incrimination. This means the police cannot force you to answer questions or provide information that could be used against you in court. You have the right to remain silent when questioned by police.

Even if officers pressure you or claim it would “look better” if you cooperate, you are under no legal obligation to speak. If an officer forces you to speak during an interrogation through threats or coercion, any statements you make may be challenged as involuntary and excluded from evidence.

Your Right to an Attorney (Fifth and Sixth Amendments)

You have the right to have an attorney present during custodial interrogations. This right comes from two sources:

• Fifth Amendment: During any custodial interrogation, you have the right to request an attorney. Once you invoke this right, police must stop questioning you until your lawyer is present.

• Sixth Amendment: Once formal criminal charges have been filed against you, you have an additional right to counsel. At this stage, police generally cannot question you without your attorney present, even if you previously waived your Miranda rights.

If you cannot afford an attorney, the state will appoint a public defender to represent you.

Having legal counsel present during an interrogation provides important protections. Your attorney can advise you which questions to answer, stop inappropriate lines of questioning, and ensure officers don’t violate your rights.

Have the Police Violated Your Miranda Rights?

When the police first take you into custody, they are required to read you your “Miranda rights.” These rights emanate from a Supreme Court case, Miranda v. Arizona (1966).

In Miranda, the court held that law enforcement must inform criminal suspects (and witnesses) of their constitutional rights at the moment they initiate custodial interrogations. They do this by issuing a “Miranda warning.”

Most people are very familiar with Miranda warnings. If you’ve ever watched a crime show on television, then you have heard some version of the Miranda warning.

Under Miranda, law enforcement must inform suspects of the following rights before they begin interrogating them:

• Right to remain silent

• Right to have an attorney present

If the police fail to read you these rights when they take you into custody, your criminal defense attorney can challenge the prosecution and demand that the state dismiss the charges.

What Happens If the Court Determines the Police’s Interrogation Tactics Were Unlawful?

If you successfully prove that law enforcement engaged in illegal interrogation tactics, several things may happen.

Normally, the judge will exclude all evidence that arose from the unlawful interrogation. This will increase the chances that the prosecutor will reduce or dismiss the charges. It may also encourage them to offer a plea deal.

Another option for the court is to impose penalties on the officers who were involved in the interrogation. The specific penalties depend on the nature of the violations and the harm suffered by the defendant.

Consult a Local Criminal Defense Attorney To Protect Your Rights

If you believe the police used illegal tactics when they interrogated you, contact an attorney immediately. The state will use whatever evidence law enforcement officers found as a result of the interrogation to prove your guilt.

If your criminal defense lawyer can prove that the interrogation violated your rights, the judge will have to exclude this evidence. This will make it a lot harder for the prosecutor to prove you guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Call a local criminal law attorney today to schedule your initial consultation. Things move quickly after your arrest, and you don’t want to wait until the last minute to seek help.