Editing Reid technique

{{Short description|Method of investigative interviewing}}
{{Use mdy dates|date=November 2018}}
The '''Reid technique''' is a method of [[interrogation]] after investigation and behavior analysis. The system was developed in the United States by John E. Reid in the 1950s. Reid was a [[polygraph]] expert and former [[Chicago]] police officer. The technique is known for creating a high pressure environment for the interviewee, followed by sympathy and offers of understanding and help, but only if a confession is forthcoming. Since its spread in the 1970s, it has been widely utilized by police departments in the United States.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Orlando |first=James |title=Interrogation Techniques |url=https://www.cga.ct.gov/2014/rpt/2014-R-0071.htm |access-date=November 30, 2023 |website=OLR Research Report}}</ref>

Proponents of the Reid technique say it is useful in extracting information from otherwise unwilling suspects. Critics say the technique results in an unacceptably high rate of [[false confession]]s, especially from juveniles and people with mental impairments. Criticism has also been leveled in the opposite case—that against strong-willed interviewees, the technique causes them to stop talking and give no information whatsoever, rather than elicit lies that can be checked against for the guilty or exonerating details for the innocent.<ref name="wired">{{Cite web |last=Kolker |first=Robert |title=A Severed Head, Two Cops, and the Radical Future of Interrogation |url=https://www.Wired.com/2016/05/how-to-interrogate-suspects/ |website=[[Wired.com|Wired]] |date=May 24, 2016 |access-date=July 10, 2016}}</ref>

==Background==
In 1931, the [[Wickersham Commission]] report, "Lawlessness in Law Enforcement", showed that violent forms of interrogation (known as the "third degree" after investigation and interview) were widespread but actually reduced crime-solving by causing false confessions.<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Third Degree |work=[[American Experience]] |url=https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/lie-detector-third-degree/ |access-date=2024-09-15 |publisher=[[PBS]] |language=en}}</ref> Involuntary alleged confessions had already been inadmissible in federal criminal trials since 1897 ''[[Bram v. United States]]''.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |last=Gallini |first=Brian |date=2010-02-01 |title=Police 'Science' in the Interrogation Room: Seventy Years of Pseudo-Psychological Interrogation Methods to Obtain Inadmissible Confessions |url=https://scholarworks.uark.edu/lawpub/29/ |journal=Hastings L.J.}}</ref> From 1936, interrogations causing obvious physical harm were ruled [[Admissible evidence|inadmissible]] by the US Supreme Court in ''[[Brown v. Mississippi]]''.<ref>{{Cite web |last=McInnis |first=Donald E. |date=2019-07-21 |title=The History of the American System of Interrogation |url=https://www.historynewsnetwork.org/article/the-history-of-the-american-system-of-interrogatio |access-date=2024-09-15 |website=History News Network |language=en}}</ref> 

A number of manuals were developed based on deception rather than assault, such as by W. R. Kidd in 1940, Clarence D. Lee in 1953 and Arther and Caputo in 1959. The most influential was from the writings of Fred E. Inbau from 1942, entitled ''Lie Detection and Criminal Interrogation''. For the third edition in 1953, Inbau invited John Reid as co-author, for a new section on so-called lie detector techniques, such as the "control question".<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Turner |first=Ralph F. |last2=Goddard |first2=Calvin |date=1953 |title=Review of Lie Detection and Criminal Interrogation |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/1140118 |journal=The Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police Science |volume=44 |issue=4 |pages=550–552 |doi=10.2307/1140118 |issn=0022-0205|url-access=subscription }}</ref> 

[[Fred E. Inbau]], a [[Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law|Northwestern University]] lawyer and criminologist, and [[John E. Reid]], a law graduate who had worked in the [[Chicago Police Department]], would publish other manuals together. Inbau had worked at the Scientific Crime Detection Laboratory (SCDL), which was set up in 1929 to better combat crime after the [[Saint Valentine's Day Massacre|St. Valentine's Day Massacre]]. Inbau became SCDL's director after it was sold by Northwestern to the Chicago police in 1938, and he trained police officers and prosecutors.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Goddard |first=Calvin |title=THE SCIENTIFIC CRIME DETECTION LABORATORY Chicago’s Answer to Mass Machine Gun Murder |url=https://chicagology.com/chicagopolice/crimelab/ |access-date=2024-09-15 |website=chicagology.com}}</ref> Both [[Leonarde Keeler|Leonard Keeler]], inventor of polygraph technology, and John Reid set up polygraph training clinics in Chicago after working at the SCDL.  

In 1955 in [[Lincoln, Nebraska]], John E. Reid had helped gain a confession from a suspect, Darrel Parker, for Parker's wife's murder. This case established Reid's reputation and popularized his technique.<ref>{{cite book |author1=Loyola University New Orleans, School of Law |title=Coming to PEACE with Police Interrogations: Abandoning the Reid Technique and Adopting the PEACE Method. - Free Online Library |publisher=The Free Library |location=II. THE REID TECHNIQUE AND ITS INHERENT ISSUES |url=https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Coming+to+PEACE+with+Police+Interrogations%3a+Abandoning+the+Reid...-a0677091177 |access-date=2 June 2024}}</ref> Parker recanted his confession the next day, but it was admitted to evidence at his trial. He was convicted by a jury and sentenced to life in prison. He was later determined to be innocent, after another man confessed and was found to have been the perpetrator. Parker sued the state for [[wrongful conviction]]; it paid him $500,000 in compensation.<ref name="starr">{{cite magazine|url=https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/12/09/the-interview-7|magazine=[[The New Yorker]]|title=The Interview: Do police interrogation techniques produce false confessions?|pages=42–49|first=Douglas|last=Starr|date=December 2, 2013|access-date=March 4, 2024}}</ref>

In spite of Parker's false confession, Reid co-authored a text explaining his interrogation techniques.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Inbau |first1=Fred E. |last2=Reid |first2=John E |last3=Buckley |first3=Joseph P. |last4=Jayne |first4=Brian C |title=Criminal Interrogation and Confessions |date=2011 |publisher=Jones & Bartlett Learning |location=Burlington, MA |isbn=978-0763799366 |edition=5th}}</ref> The first edition of the "Reid Manual" (''Criminal Interrogation and Confessions'') in 1962, was heavily criticized by the US Supreme Court.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Cray |first=Ed |date=1968 |title=Criminal Interrogations and Confessions: The Ethical Imperative |url=https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/wlr1968&div=16&id=&page= |journal=Wisconsin Law Review |volume=1968 |pages=173}}</ref> Its famous ''[[Miranda v. Arizona]]'' warnings were made in large part in response to the psychological [[subjugation]] and risks of the Reid techniques. Inbau and Reid gained public notability themselves, due also to appearing in a 1964 inquiry into the federal government's use of "lie detectors".<ref name=":0" /> 

A second edition of the manual, in 1967, incorporated advice on how to use [[Miranda warning|Miranda warnings]]. A third edition, in 1986, marked the start of what has been called "the new Reid method".<ref>{{Cite web |last=Hirsch |first=Alan |date=2014-03-01 |title=Going to the Source: The 'New' Reid Method and False Confessions |url=https://openurl.ebsco.com/EPDB:gcd:14:15302750/detailv2?sid=ebsco:plink:scholar&id=ebsco:gcd:119759641&crl=c |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200825191113/https://kb.osu.edu/bitstream/handle/1811/73465/OSJCL_V11N2_803.pdf |archive-date=Aug 25, 2020 |access-date=2024-09-15 |website=Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law |language=en}}</ref>

Reid died in 1982, and Joseph Buckley became president of Reid Inc.<ref name="starr" /> By 2013, according to ''[[The New Yorker]]'', the company trained "more interrogators than any other company in the world",<ref name="starr"/> and Reid's technique had been adopted by law enforcement agencies of many different types,{{Vague|date=July 2023}} with it being especially influential in North America.<ref>{{cite journal|url=https://ssrn.com/abstract=1474813|journal=[[Hastings Law Journal]]|title=Police 'Science' in the Interrogation Room: Seventy Years of Pseudo-Psychological Interrogation Methods to Obtain Inadmissible Confessions|first=Brian|last=Gallini|issue=61|date=February 2010|page=529|access-date=24 March 2020}}</ref>

== Process ==
{{more citations needed|section||date=October 2019}}
The Reid technique consists of a three-phase process beginning with fact analysis, followed by the behavior analysis interview (a non-accusatory interview designed to develop investigative and behavioral information),<ref name="starr" /> followed, when appropriate, by the Reid nine steps of interrogation. According to process guidelines, individuals should be interrogated only when the information developed from the interview and investigation indicate that the subject is involved in the commission of the crime.

In the Reid technique, interrogation is an accusatory process, in which the investigator tells the suspect that the results of the investigation clearly indicate that they did commit the crime in question.<ref name="starr" /> The interrogation is in the form of a [[monologue]] presented by the investigator rather than a question and answer format. The demeanor of the investigator during the course of an interrogation is ideally understanding, patient, and non-demeaning. The Reid technique user's goal is to make the suspect gradually more comfortable with telling the truth. This is accomplished by the investigator's first imagining and then offering the suspect various psychological [[Social constructionism|constructs]] as justification for their behavior.

For example, an admission of guilt might be prompted by the question, "Did you plan this out or did it just happen on the spur of the moment?" This is called an alternative question, which is based on an [[implicit assumption]] of guilt. Critics regard this strategy as hazardous, arguing that it is subject to [[confirmation bias]] (likely to reinforce inaccurate beliefs or assumptions) and may lead to prematurely narrowing an investigation.

=== Nine steps of interrogation ===
The Reid technique's nine steps of interrogation are:<ref>{{cite book |first1=David E. |last1=Zulawski |first2=Douglas E. |last2=Wicklander |year=2001 |title=Practical Aspects of Interview and Interrogation |location=Ann Arbor |publisher=CRC Press |isbn=978-0-8493-0101-8}}</ref>

# Positive confrontation. Advise the suspect that the evidence has led the police to the individual as a suspect. Offer the person an early opportunity to explain why the offense took place.
# Try to shift the blame away from the suspect to some other person or set of circumstances that prompted the suspect to commit the crime. That is, develop themes containing reasons that will psychologically justify or excuse the crime. Themes may be developed or changed to find one to which the accused is most responsive.
# Try to minimize the frequency of suspect denials.
# At this point, the accused will often give a reason why they did not or could not commit the crime. Try to use this to move towards the acknowledgement of what they did.
# Reinforce sincerity to ensure that the suspect is receptive.
# The suspect will become quieter and listen. Move the theme of the discussion toward offering alternatives. If the suspect cries at this point, infer guilt.
# Pose the "alternative question", giving two choices for what happened; one more socially acceptable than the other. The suspect is expected to choose the easier option but whichever alternative the suspect chooses, guilt is admitted. There is always a third option which is to maintain that they did not commit the crime.
# Lead the suspect to repeat the admission of guilt in front of witnesses and develop corroborating information to establish the validity of the confession.
# Document the suspect's admission or confession and have him or her prepare a recorded statement (audio, video or written).

== Validity ==
Critics claim the technique too easily produces [[false confession]]s,<ref>{{cite journal| last1=Kassin |first1=S. M. |last2=Appleby |first2=S. C. |last3=Perillo |first3=J. T. |title=Interviewing suspects: Practice, science, and future directions |journal=Legal and Criminological Psychology |date=February 2010 |volume=15 |pages=39–55 |doi=10.1348/135532509X449361|doi-access=free }} ([http://www.williams.edu/Psychology/Faculty/Kassin/files/K-A-P%2009.pdf preprint])</ref> especially with juveniles,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Drizin |first1=S. A. |last2=Leo |first2=R. A. |year=2004 |title=The problem of false confessions in the post-DNA world |url=https://scholarship.law.unc.edu/nclr/vol82/iss3/3/ |journal=North Carolina Law Review |volume=82 |pages=891–1007}} ([http://www.williams.edu/Psychology/Faculty/Kassin/files/drizenl.leo.04.pdf preprint])</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Beck |first=Susan |title=Saving Anthony Harris |url=http://www.americanlawyer-digital.com/americanlawyer-ipauth/tal200903ip?folio=8&pg=78#pg78 |journal=The American Lawyer |volume=XXXI |number=3 |date=March 2009 |pages=76–79, 90}} [http://www.reid.com/pdfs/harris2009.pdf Online at John E. Reid & Associates, Inc.]</ref> with second-language speakers in their non-native language,<ref>{{cite web |title=''Gonzales v. State of Nevada'' |url=http://www.reid.com/pdfs/summer2015/Gonzales.pdf |publisher=Westlaw |access-date=26 February 2019 |archive-date=October 20, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161020103821/http://www.reid.com/pdfs/summer2015/Gonzales.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref> and with people whose communication/language abilities are affected by [[Developmental disability|mental disabilities]], including reduced intellectual capacity.<ref name="Georgetown University Law Center">{{cite journal |last1=Rogal |first1=Lauren |date=Winter 2017 |title=Protecting Persons with Mental Disabilities from Making False Confessions: The Americans with Disabilities Act as a Safeguard |url=https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nmlr/vol47/iss1/4/ |journal=New Mexico Law Review |volume=47 |issue=1 |pages=64–98 |access-date=26 February 2019}}</ref> While this criticism acknowledges that the technique can be "effective" in producing confessions, it is not accurate at getting guilty parties to confess, instead sweeping up people pushed to their mental limits by stress. Critics also dislike how police often apply the technique on subjects of unclear guilt, when simply gathering more information in non-stressful interrogations can be more useful both for convicting guilty suspects and exonerating innocent suspects.<ref name="wired" />

Of 311 people exonerated through post-conviction [[DNA]] testing, more than a quarter had given false confessions—including those convicted in such notorious cases as the [[Central Park jogger case|Central Park Five]].<ref name="starr"/>

Some of the more minor details Reid propounded have since been called into question as well. For example, Reid believed that "tells" such as fidgeting was a [[lie detection|sign of lying]], and more generally believed that trained police interrogators could intuitively check lies merely by how they were delivered. Later studies have shown no useful correlation between any sort of body movements such as breaking eye contact or fidgeting and truth-telling. While police can be effective at cracking lies, it is via gathering contradicting evidence; police officers have been shown in studies to be no better than average people at detecting lies merely from their delivery.<ref name="wired" />

Several European countries prohibit some interrogation techniques that are currently allowed in the United States, such as a law enforcement officer lying to a suspect about evidence, due to the perceived risk of false confessions and [[wrongful conviction]]s that might result, particularly with juveniles.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Vrij |first1=A. |year=1998 |chapter=Interviewing Suspects |editor1-first=A. |editor1-last=Memon |editor2-first=A. |editor2-last=Vrij |editor3-first=R. |editor3-last=Bull |title=Psychology and Law: Truthfulness, Accuracy and Credibility |location=Maidenhead, UK |publisher=McGraw-Hill |isbn=9780077093167 |oclc=924932857 |pages=124–144}}</ref> For example, §136a of the German {{lang|de|{{ill2|Strafprozessordnung|de|Strafprozessordnung (Deutschland)}}}} (StPO, "code of criminal procedure") bans the use of deception and intimidation in interrogations; the Reid method also conflicts with the German police's obligation to adequately inform the suspect of their [[Right to silence#Germany|right to silence]].<ref>{{cite web |last=Steinert |first=Ulf |date=2010 |title=Kriminalistik/Kriminaltechnik Skriptum: Vernehmungslehre |url=http://gletschertraum.de/Lehrmaterialien/10Vernehmungslehre_Skriptum.pdf |publisher=Brandenburg State Police Academy and College|language=de |access-date=1 June 2018}}</ref>

In Canada, [[provincial court]] judge Mike Dinkel ruled in 2012 that "stripped to its bare essentials, the Reid technique is a guilt-presumptive, confrontational, psychologically manipulative procedure whose purpose is to extract a confession".<ref name=canada2012>{{cite news |last=Quan |first=Douglas |date=September 10, 2012 |title=Judge's ruling finds widely used police interrogation technique 'oppressive' |url=http://www.canada.com/Judge+ruling+finds+widely+used+police+interrogation+technique+oppressive/7220193/story.html |publisher=[[Canada.com]]}}</ref>

In December 2013, an unredacted copy of a secret [[Federal Bureau of Investigation|FBI]] interrogation manual was discovered in the [[Library of Congress]], available for public view. The manual confirmed [[American Civil Liberties Union]] concerns that FBI agents used the Reid technique in interrogations.<ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Baumann |first=Nick |date=December 20, 2013 |title=You'll never guess where this FBI agent left a secret interrogation manual |url=https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/12/fbi-copyrighted-interrogation-manual-unredacted-secrets/ |magazine=[[Mother Jones (magazine)|Mother Jones]] |access-date=17 April 2019}}</ref>

Abuses of interrogation methods include officers treating accused suspects aggressively and telling them lies about the amount of evidence proving their guilt. Such exaggerated claims of evidence, such as video or genetics, have the potential, when combined with such coercive tactics as threats of harm or promises of leniency, to cause innocent suspects to become psychologically overwhelmed.<ref name="CBC_2003">{{cite news |url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/widely-used-police-interrogation-technique-can-result-in-false-confession-disclosure-1.389125 |title=Widely used police interrogation technique can result in false confession: Disclosure |publisher=[[CBC News]] |date=January 28, 2003 |access-date=July 30, 2015}}</ref><ref name="PEACE_2015">{{cite news |last=Quan |first=Douglas |date=July 30, 2015 |title=RCMP adopts gentler grilling of suspects |url=https://thestarphoenix.com/news/local-news/rcmp-adopts-gentler-grilling-of-suspects |work=[[The StarPhoenix]] |location=Saskatoon |access-date=January 13, 2015}}</ref>

In 2015, eight organizations, including John E. Reid & Associates, settled with [[Juan Rivera (wrongful conviction)|Juan Rivera]], who was wrongfully convicted of the 1992 rape and murder of 11-year-old Holly Staker. A number of pieces of evidence excluded Rivera, including [[DNA]] from the PERK (Physical Evidence Recovery Kit) and the report from the electronic ankle monitor he was wearing at the time, as he awaited trial for a non-violent burglary, but he falsely confessed to the Staker crimes after being interrogated by the police several days after taking two polygraph examinations at Reid & Associates. After his exoneration, Rivera filed a suit for false arrest and [[malicious prosecution]]. The case was settled out of court with John E. Reid & Associates paying $2 million.<ref name=Starr>{{cite magazine |last1=Starr |first1=Douglas |date=May 22, 2015 |title=Juan Rivera and the Dangers of Coercive Interrogation|url=http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/juan-rivera-and-the-dangers-of-coercive-interrogation |magazine=The New Yorker}}</ref>

===Alternative models===
The [[PEACE method of interrogation|PEACE]] (Preparation and Planning, Engage and Explain, Account, Closure and Evaluate)<ref>{{Cite news |first=Terry |last=Gross |author-link=Terry Gross |date=December 5, 2013 |title=Beyond Good Cop/Bad Cop: A Look at Real-Life Interrogations |url=https://www.npr.org/2013/12/05/248968150/beyond-good-cop-bad-cop-a-look-at-real-life-interrogations |work=[[Fresh Air]] |publisher=[[NPR]] |access-date=October 13, 2016}}</ref> model developed in Britain "encourages more of a dialogue between investigator and suspect".<ref name="PEACE_2015"/>

In 2015, the [[Royal Canadian Mounted Police]] adopted a new standard influenced by the PEACE model. Sergeant Darren Carr, who trains police with the new approach, described it as "less [[Kojak]] and more [[Dr. Phil]]". This approach eschews the use of deceptive information to overwhelm suspects. It emphasizes information gathering over eliciting confessions and discourages investigators from presuming a suspect's guilt.<ref name="PEACE_2015"/>

== See also ==
* [[Loaded question]]
* [[PEACE method of interrogation]]
* [[Suggestive question]]

== References ==
{{Reflist}}

== Further reading ==
* {{Cite news |first=Kelly |last=McEvers|author-link=Kelly McEvers|date=May 23, 2016 |title=In New Age of Interrogations, Police Focus on Building Rapport |url=https://www.npr.org/2016/05/23/479207853/in-new-age-of-interrogations-police-focus-on-building-rapport |work=[[All Things Considered]] |publisher=[[NPR]] |access-date=October 13, 2016 |ref=none}}
* {{Cite web |last=Anderson |first=Meg |date=November 8, 2024 |title=It's Legal for Police to Use Deception in Interrogations. Advocates Want That to End |url=https://www.npr.org/2024/10/21/nx-s1-4974964/police-deception-bans |work=[[All Things Considered]] |publisher=[[NPR]] |access-date=November 9, 2024}}

== External links ==
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20090330105018/http://faculty.law.wayne.edu/moran/The%20REID%209%20STEPS%20OF%20INTERROGATION.htm "The Reid 9 Steps of Interrogation, in Brief"], with key points
* [https://people.howstuffworks.com/police-interrogation.htm "How Police Interrogation Works"] by Julia Layton, [[HowStuffWorks]]

{{Psychological manipulation}}
{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Reid technique}}
[[Category:Interrogation techniques]]
[[Category:Law enforcement in the United States]]
[[Category:Law enforcement in Canada]]